Ducati Monster Forum

http://www.gizmag.com/ducati-pataents-semi-monocoque-motogp-frame-for-roadbbikes/14285/ (http://www.gizmag.com/ducati-pataents-semi-monocoque-motogp-frame-for-roadbbikes/14285/)

   :o

Rider "Bike has a wicked steering head shake / wobble!"

Tech "Oh, that's the cause... I didn't tighten the cylinder head bolt."

Odd...  but I can see why they did it.

Getting rid of the trellis one bit at a time. I doubt this will leave the GP realm anytime soon though. (Save a follow up D16 800cc version)

that would really, really surprise me.

holy crap

Early move to a V4 SBK...with better access to the valves for maintenance??  ;D

If your tech is sending you out there with loose bolts you have more problems than chassis design.

Forgive me for picking fly shit out of the pepper, but it looks to have two frames; one in front and one in back.

Besides, reminds me of essentially the same set up on the Vincent Black Shadow (and other Vincents).

Still, pretty cool.

I think that is the point.  The engine joins together the two monocoque frame sections.  It looks pretty awesome to me.  And light.  And light is fast. 

I, for one, welcome our semi-monocoque overlords.

I do love the heritage and design of the Trellis.  It is one of those things that makes a Ducati a Ducati in my mind.  I however never get tired of saying the word "Monocoque"..... Monocoque..  I'm all for something new and innovative, but I do love my trellis frames.  Sure.. I'd love to own a V4 Monocoque Ducati.. Sounds like it'd be one hell of a trackbike!

Looks like the "frame" would be hollow to double as the airbox, or does that go without saying?

 [puke]

Whilst i love the trellis frame this is the kinds of things that keep Ducati rolling in world titles.

in 20 years you'll be able to buy a M900 sport classic but it'll have a trellis unobtanium frame, weigh 200lbs and have 200hp  ;D

Yep.

there's an airbox, a swingarm, and a subframe.  the engine is bolted to all three.  if the engine weren't there, there would be nothing to connect them to.

generally a frame is something the engine bolts into.. something that, er, frames it and the other major pieces.

if you want to get peppery about it, the engine is the anti-frame.  :)

+1. Despite the inevitable wave of "Ain't got no trellis, it ain't no Ducati" I think it's a great idea for the superbikes. Get that weight down and make 'em faster.

That said, it wouldn't make a naked as pretty.

as someone mentioned, that's pretty much what the vincent had.  and not too different from
the Britten either.  not bad ideas, but not new either.

(http://www.cybermotorcycle.com/gallery/ducati/images/Ducati_450_Scrambler.jpg)

No trellis here...it's undoubtedly a Duc...says so right on the tank.

think about it, it would probably make the "perfect" naked bike.

why? because the headtube to engine part doubles as an airbox so you can hide also ellectronics and such up there even better than a monster once the tank is on, the subframe and rear swing arm are there but basically they are hollow too so you can hide more things up in teh subframe area connection, meaning all that is left is literally the engine hanging down now.  so in a way all that you can see is the engine block and the radiator in front. 

that two frame design probabgly if they tried would make an engine look very very clean for a naked bike.  with any luck in 10 years maybe that carbon monocoque frame will be just as normal as the steel trellis frame on road bikes. we can only hope.

If you look at our Monster frames or even better, the frames used on the SC and I believe it was the old SS's as well, all that is really cut out is about 9 inches of tubing that connects the top rail of the frame from front to back. Then they reworked it to connect to the cylinderhead instead. So it may be a technological step forward and superior in many ways I have no doubt, I do doubt however that weight savings would be of any note assuming both designes used similar size and material in the tubing. In fact with the extra gussetting that may be required for the frame and engine there may be no weight savings apples to apples.

I think it is likely lighter and stiffer, or else they wouldn't have done it.  If the CF is properly laid and shaped it can be significantly lighter than the comparable strength Al frame would be, much less a steel one.  Also, they were probably able to make a significantly more rigid frame while maintaining low weight which will allow the bike to handle that much better.

Plus, I would think that any weight savings would be up high, so, less weight up high would equal a lower center of gravity which also helps in the handling department.

Buell calls it "centralization of mass".

  The article did mention that the patent was for mainly the GP9 and 10 technology, which we could all see down the road as standard race bike technology, but I wonder if this patent has anything to do with the new Moto GP rule changes which gives weight and fuel bonuses to the manufactures whose bikes use a more "production based" design. Maybe we'll see a new batch of limited edition Desmosedicis based street bikes on the GP 9 and 10 design?
  Detroit used this tactic in the early days of drag and stock car racing to allow mega engines and special parts on the track.    

yeah they announced this last summer i thought.

The article was estimating around 5 kg-that's pretty big, IMO.

It's fairly easy to see a V4 frameless SBK after the reign of the 1198.

(http://www.motosolvang.com/images_new/large/1995_Britten_V1000_02.jpg)

Ducati could easily put a V4 high end bike marketed above the 1198 for around 30-40k and sell it well.
the original D16 did well, but at that price couldn't sustain sales. 30-40k less and it could be sustained in small numbers. the question is can Ducati make it for less than that.

that website is infected...

 ;D in French we have a similar expression that literally translates to "sodomizing flies"  [beer]

my first thought as well.

Back in my Navy days we would call such a person a needle-dick bug-make the beast with two backser.

Yep, there have been a few frameless bikes. I had a chance to ride that one, back when i lived in NZ.

It used to be that racing improved the showroom offerings...  now I am not so sure anymore.  Is it possible that what is good for the highest levels of racing is not necessarily a good thing on the street or in your garage?  I can think of a few go-fast goodies that never made it to production.

Racing still improves street machines...just not everything is applicable. Supposedly the oval throttle bodies on the current gen. SBK motors were developed and refined on the MotoGP bike.