Some autorenewing subscriptions have failed to automatically renew. If you find you can't read subscriber articles, or think this applies to you please read this.

Land Of The Setting Sun - Is The Japanese Era In MotoGP Coming To An End?

By David Emmett |

It would have been at Estoril, in 2011. Casey Stoner had left Ducati at the end of the previous year and joined Honda, and was immediately fast. During a press debrief, technical journalist Neil Spalding asked Stoner a simple question.

"Long and low, or short and high?"

Stoner did not hesitate.

"Short and high."

I was reminded of this brief exchange at the Sepang MotoGP test. In the context of 2011, Stoner's answer made perfect sense. After spending four seasons wrestling with the long and low Ducati, the bike getting less competitive every year, it was a revelation for Stoner to get on the RC212V, the 800cc Honda. He could now brake, load the front as much as he wanted, pitch the bike into the turn and then fire it out again. No more battling with the front end of the Ducati.

Why was short and high better? Because it allowed for better weight transfer under braking, allowing riders to load the front tire before entering the corner. As the riders braked, the forks would bury the front wheel into the tarmac, the rear wheel lifting, putting the entire weight of the bike onto the front tire.

Especially beneficial in the Bridgestone era, with a solid front tire that would give unlimited grip as long as you loaded it sufficiently.

The downside was that the bike could react unpredictably when the rear wheel came back down as the rider eased off the brake to enter the corner. Managing that became the hallmark of a great rider, a skill at which Marc Marquez is arguably the master.

There was a disadvantage on corner exit too. If the weight transfer of a short and high bike helped on the way into the corner, it made getting out of the corner physically demanding. The weight transfer would help the rear tire dig in, but it would also make the bike want to wheelie, meaning riders would have to crawl all over the front of the bike in an attempt to keep the front wheel down.

In the era of free electronics, factories would develop sophisticated anti-wheelie strategies to cope with this, and try to find the optimal balance between drive and wheelie. Once MotoGP entered the spec electronics era, that path was no longer open.

The arrival of spec electronics, together with the switch from Bridgestone to Michelin as official tire supplier, would bring about a sea change in the most effective form of bike setup. Without electronics to manage wheelie control, manufacturers began to look at alternative methods of keeping the front down in acceleration. And the very different nature of the Michelin tires – a more pliant front and a very grippy rear – it became much harder to stop the bike with just the front wheel.

How to deal with wheelie in an age of spec electronics? The answer is simple: wings. The introduction of the Magneti Marelli ECU and single software forced the factories to turn to aerodynamics to solve some of the problems previously handled by electronic engine management.

Ducati were the first to embrace aerodynamics, having dipped their toes in back in 2010. The first iteration in 2015 was just a stubby but broad wing in the mid-section of the fairing. But within a year, the bike had sprouted wings everywhere, with even the wings sprouting wings.

2023
MotoGP
Sepang, Malaysia
Aprilia
Ducati
Honda
KTM
Yamaha
CormacGP
Scott Jones
Tony Goldsmith
↑Back to top

Comments

This is remarkable insight into the evolution of these packages in the last few years, and the role of CG (center of gravity) effects. It makes you wonder how teams can even find the language to translate the rider's experience and felt needs into a positive adjustment when there are so many variables in play. Is the solution to "It doesn't want to turn when I do X" a change in front suspension setting or spring rate change, swing-arm length, tire compound or pressure, rider body position, braking technique, engine-brake effect, chassis stiffness or CG, etc. !!?? I was a casual (mediocre) amateur racer for a few years and this makes my brain explode. Brilliant analysis David.

Tour de force commentary David! What a careful analysis, explanation and example of the past and current strengths and weaknesses of each bike and factory and the rider's candid overview/comments adding color. Going to read it all again and soak it in...Thanks once again for your excellent attention to the details and wordsmithing...can't wait for this year's racing!

Excellent piece, thanks! Regarding aero: I sometimes have to think back to the radical 'hammerhead' fairing Lorenzo tested early 2017. Seemed bizarre at the time, but if you look at the bikes now, they are actually not far off.

A really interesting article David but you didnt include Suzuki and how succesful they were with what appeared to be a short and high design. Could you comment on the Suzuki and why that worked when the Yamaha and the Honda struggled in 2022.

This is partlicuraly interesting with Ken Kawauchis move to Honda.

If the Honda evolves to low and long Marc will need to evolve his style from front centric to a more balanced front/rear style - how do you think he will cope with this?

Good point about Suzuki. But I think this shift from front to back is a gradual process, not a matter of day and night. As Ducati and Aprilia perfect their bikes, it gets harder for the Japanese factories to compete. Suzuki were competitive at times last year, also because they could manage braking with the rear. But Ducati was fast at every track, in every condition.

I think the inline 4 mfgs have greater freedom to locate the CofG, both vertically and horizontally. The I4 can be repositioned in the chassis with a relatively small amount of fuss, OTOH, moving a V4 around necessitates significant changes. Yamaha had it right but lacked HP, Suzuki had it right but needed to get there ride height device sorted.  Well, its a theory 

 

 

The long awaited 'new' front tyre that is long overdue may have a bearing on what David has written about so succinctly in this excellent article. Although this trye is yet to show its presence, might this have an impact for better or worse for the two opposing strategies (low and long, high and short). I guess only time will tell and as per usual there will undoutedly be winners and losers.

Roll on Portugal! it has been a long wait.

 

My first thought as well! Great minds, etc etc. I know the Japanese factories don't want to lose now and hope for success later, but surely that has to be playing on their minds yes? A complete overhaul on bike philosophy is no small risk when a new front is imminent. But we don't even have a date; 2024 at the earliest, but maybe even 2025. I don't envy the decision makers at those teams, that's for sure.

Great piece Dave and I can see the long. The low argument is to me is greatly over-stated. If you look at all the bikes static it looks to me like there is a quite similar headstock to tank top to rear cowl angle on all of them. Cretainly no huge differences. The pictures you point to make the point are not convincing. The front suspension on the Ducati well out of its downward stroke compared to the Yamaha. The Ducati is also well into its rear ride height squat driving out of the corner. The Yamaha front is still compressed some 2 plus inches more than the Ducati and the rear ride height either hasn't kicked in or it's not used at the point on the track where the picture, the rear spring being lightly loaded judging by the rear tire to undertail gap. Maybe you're right but the pics you reference are not evidence of your point.

Agree that the photos don't tell the full story. I am a bit hamstrung by the choice of photos I have at my disposal. They are more illustrative than informative. The article is based on what riders tell me and discussions with engineers and others. 

Above all, it is not as black and white as I am painting it, but it is the trend and general direction MotoGP is moving.

I think photos 'on track' can be a very tricky medium for angles. Might also be worth considering that to some degree ride height devices offer the best of both worlds. The high(er) bike obviously allowed to be a low(er) bike when commanded. Possibly, once exploited, this could explain the non-turning 'I need more turning' Ducati of the Dovi era becoming the all conquering bike of last year.

Interesting analysis, David. Thank you.

In one video of the TecnoDovi series just prior to the beginning of the shortened 2020 motogp season (July), Dovizioso stated that in recent years Ducati had been providing him with taller and taller bikes. Such that it had gotten to the point where he needed the mechanics to balance the bike before he exited the pits. And Dovi was very grateful for the ride-height device (which may have partly been conceptualized because the bikes kept getting taller). 

Just one rider's and crew chief's story about the very technical side of setting up the bike. And also prior to the most recent gains in aero and ride-height devices.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRZ9dn37Mw0

Awesome article David, thanks.   Your comment about small iterations may be Tru for those already well along the path of low and long but is that going to be sufficient for the 2 left behind? Or, are they waiting for the mythical front tyre that will save them?        

A brilliant article David, got me even more excited for the upcoming season.

What are your chances of getting an interview with Tom O'Kane (Engineer moved from Suzuki to Yamaha) on the move, the differences seen at his new employer and the current/future state of this racing series?

Is MM93 exceptional ability perpetuating Honda’s problem? Can’t help but wonder simply because the type of bike he likes the feel of isn’t winning races anymore. It’s akin to when MotoGP went to Michelin how some older riders (and possibly their engineers) spent a couple of years trying to get their bike to have the same corner feel as Bridgestone. Ultimately they moved on and everything has evolved.

I recall reading an article from Neil Hodgson after a media ride on Ianonne’s D16. He said much the same and couldn’t beieve how physical the bike was to turn/ride thanks to that long/low bike attitude, but acknowledged the advantages it bestowed. As Simon Crafar says “It’s not who get’s on the gas first, it’s who gets to full gas first”.

But, the blue elephant in the room is that Yamaha came within a whisker of winning the championship last year on a bike with an ancient engine. Had either of the two previous iterations proven remotely reliable we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

Still a great article, thanks David!

Agree on Yamaha being very near. The engine was never a bad engine. In absolute terms, losing ~10m over a 1000m straight isn't a disaster. However, in current motogp terms it is a bit of a disaster. Also, have to remember, last year, to what seems like quite a large degree, Yamaha came close to winning because of Fabio.

Marc's absence really brought Honda's follies into focus. I think I was saying years ago that they never really changed the bike to suit the Michelins, and have dug themselves into a near decade long development hole I don't know that they can get out of. They went from leading in tech (they brought the seamless gearbox to the grid) to where they are now. It's sad.

I do wish whoever makes the technical rules would lighten up. Perhaps the Japanese could catch up if things like active suspensions were allowed. That could enable finer control of weight transfer to let the short and high concept gain more rear traction. I'm sure a few lines and variables in code and hydraulic actuators wouldn't cost much more if at all than whatever they're spending optimising the passive setups now. And the animals have already left the barn on tech in MotoGP. Might as well lean all the way into it IMO.

Avoiding run away costs has always been cited as the reason for the tech constraints but I do wonder what standard ECUs have cost teams in finding work-arounds. I hate to think what aero is costing in R&D and crash repairs. Banning twin clutches seems pointless and active suspension (air even) is now relatively commonplace in the real world. Yes, tyres…… You can argue that pure manual brakes are a race skill thing, but so is being in the right gear and matching engine speed to it…… Maybe saying fairings have to be single skin and max X mm from the main adjacent component with no more than one wing of surface area Y mm2 on each side….. No wonder the rule book is so big. 

Yea, the cost thing makes no sense to me for several reasons. 1, teams get fixed budgets and are just going to prioritize that amount on what is most important. 2, more money doesn't necessarily equate to better results- Honda and KTM are among the richest factories on the grid yet they have had the worst results over the last few years. And 3, like you said a lot of the tech is out on relatively affordable street bikes- I'm sure the money spent on developing mechanical solutions is no small sum, but it's also probably not as effective or transferrable as electronic solutions would be. 

Plus if it is all running through the spec ECU I think that will constrain costs on new tech, the same way the spec ECU kind of capped engine spending. Electronics are one place I think MotoGP needs a rethink. If a $20K street bike has more tech than a $1MM MotoGP bike that's a problem IMO.

Just like to add my congratulations on the new site and look forward to more in-depth articles throughout the year.

Couple of questions/observations. 

How will the new tyre pressure rules be policed and what effect will they have?

 We saw last year a lot of close racing but on some circuits not a lot of passing. My heart sinks when I read that F1 aerodynamicists are now involved in the bikes as it may well lead to more of the same. It’s one thing to be fast on an empty track but when you are in the middle of a bunch of racers, those aerodynamics may well play against you.

You can’t shove the genie back into the bottle but if all we get is a Ducati procession then while I have to applaud their ingenuity I fear for the short and long term involvement of the other manufacturers. 

It appears Mark Marquez is making the sort of comments of someone who doesn’t want to be where he is now. I do wonder how much his long term recovery has taken his edge off? I also wonder if he wants to do a Rossi and win a world championship on another manufacturer’s bike?

Hight/short vs. Low/long -- a simple and compelling schema for understanding the engineering philosophy behind bike design. I like it. 

Is this the end of the Japanese era? Difficult to say. They are in a tough spot, and their alliance has crumbled over the last 15 years. Kawasaki withdrew in disgust and Suzuki have failed to rediscover their raison d'etre. However, the crumbling Japanese alliance is due in part to Dorna's various hatchet jobs. Overall, it seems Dorna constantly falls victim to the crocodile paradox, the errant belief that avoiding a single bad outcome will protect them from doom. Dorna's predilection for wayward overcorrection will probably not subside, especially if the apple falls close to the tree. In other words, Dorna will probably anger the European manufacturers at some point, and the European alliance will start to meltdown. F1 is a good case study. A group of culturally similar people will form a political alliance and scheme to take control, only to discover that no one is asking for this outcome. Eventually, the scheming against outsiders becomes infighting. The question is not whether it will happen. The questions are "how long will it take for the pendulum to swing the other way?" and "how forcefully with the situation correct?".

If Suzuki's withdrawal marks the Japanese MSMA's winter of discontent, they have no one to blame but themselves. They pushed through the unpopular 800cc regs. They weren't ready for the blowback, nor did they understand the technical implications of their own rules. They allowed Dorna to force through the 81mm 1000cc 4-cylinder formula, which is an apparent attempt to control peak power by over-torquing the engines? This seems to be the driving force behind ride height, aero, and the long and low cataclysm. It also seems the 1000cc "solution" was the result of Dorna rejecting a less-costly 800cc formula, which might have put Superbike in an advantageous position. Despite Dorna now operating both series, and 3 of the 5 SBK participating in GP, the GP paddock is still somehow looking at Superbike when they weigh proposals to slow down MotoGP.

I'm unsure how this doom loop was created, but it was the driving force behind Suzuki's decision to completely disengage, imo. Dorna had them in a compromised position, and Ezpeleta was surely smart enough to gag them. Global business environment and EV's blah blah. Suzuki doesn't withdraw if the series are self-sufficient and driving motorcycle sales. They withdraw when MotoGP keeps making the same fiscal and technical mistakes, and refuses to change. Suzuki withdraws when SBK is a MotoGP clone with bikes that aren't going to jump the Euro5 and Euro6 hurdles without significant development spending. 

Covered here before by Mr DE but it is a fundamental. I’m enjoying WSBK racing more even while I appreciate (yes, the Rossi years of shear enjoyment are very much faded) MGP technology and find myself drawn back to F1 because of the amazingly refined tech. MGP needs to recapture its zeitgeist before millions depart and are very difficult to attract back.

I’m just not so sure of Yamaha/Honda being consigned to the ranks of latter-day CRT bikes.

Yamah/Fabio lead most of the chsmpionship last year and Fabio was widely regarded as the best rider. But for an incredible run by Pecco, which no other Ducati rider came close to emulating, Fabio would be a dual Motogp champion. The bike only needed something that wasn’t a 3 year old engine, there was nothing wrong with the dynamics of the bike.

Honda? People forget that a rookie Alex Marquez scored 2 x podiums on that thing in 2020 with zero data available ftom his busted bro’. He looked odds on to win sooner or later in the wet.

Then Pol plonked the thing atop the timesheets in pre-season testing 2022 (Mandalika). What’s not to like?

And a still unfit Marc won twice last year, even with a twisted wing. The bike was very close to what he wanted, albeit nobody else, certainly good enough to challenge for the title even in his poor physical confition. 

The Honda hasn’t look flash in testing….but it’s only testing. I won’t be the slightest bit surpised if/when Marc is in the mix come season’s end, and who would bet against Fabio?

Honda and Yamaha can probably adjust and build a better mousetrap, but should they? This isn't the first time short/high and long/low have faced off. This also isn't the first time teams have been playing around with active ride height. 

Ultimately, paradigms change. Electronic active suspension was banned once, and hydraulic systems will probably be banned, or rendered less influencial or swapped for a spec electronic unit. Aero regulations could be changed. Michelin could change tire specs. Dorna also predicts that the new biofuel regulations will take a bite out of engine performance. Maybe none of these will happen or maybe all of them will happen. We don't know the inner workings of the sport, or the deals various MSMA members are making behind the scenes to alter the technical regulations. 

There is a lot for the manufacturers to consider before making the decision to completely alter their bike. 

2019 was the "great evil year" and fault rests on Dorna negligence. THEN the pandemic cements it. What? Ride height device allowed (2nd), atop having left the front - rear tire balance off via too soft a front carcass. I remain ANGRY and disgusted. Nothing more to be said, it has all been said 3x. 

This article, and next w Michelin? Great stuff. And, disgust.

Clicking on new comments works!

'Shrink made a comment and the "1 new comment" button took me straight to it. Motoshrink not happy at the moment.

I still can't add an image, never mind.

Racing starts on Friday! Petrucci and Gardner (among others) testing at Philip Island today & tomorrow.

It was very helpful in the past "New" was in red. Maybe it's just my old eyes but it's much easier to find in red. Otherwise, loving the new site. Great work.