THREE big quEsTions
1 is THERE AnYTHing wRong wiTH THE old onE?
no, not really. if you’re sure you want a big supermoto it’s most accomplished. but while it sold well in its first year, sales slowed so ducati have spruced it up to keep up with rival KTMs and generate fresh interest.
2 Evo sounds fAncY. is iT? it’s merely an abbreviation of evolution and not an indication that the Hypermotard has been transformed into a muscle-tearing 150bhp beast. instead it’s been honed for more power and less weight, with tweaked detailing, which doesn’t sound so impressive.
3 wHY’s iT An sP, noT jusT An s? Essentially it’s simply to signify this is the special version, just as the s and R tags highlight the racier sportsbike incarnations. it’s not an indication of a return to older-style ducati labelling either – there won’t be an 1198sPs…
F i r S t
r i D e
Ducati HypermotarD 1100 eVo Sp
Take seven kilos off the old bike, add 5bhp and voilá: Hypermotard Evo Words Mike Armitage Photography Milagro
20
Ducati know how to make a bike desirable. I’m not talking about beautiful lines or lovingly crafted components, but the all-important name. If, like me, you were drawn to imported Japanese 400s as much for their gloriously flamboyant names as for their rarity, then rejoice at Ducati’s latest: the Hypermotard 1100 EVO SP. With a name like that, how can it be anything but brilliant? To celebrate its second birthday, Ducati have given the Hypermotard a going-over. It’s evolution rather than drastic change, which explains the amended names: the base 1100 becomes the 1100 EVO; and the S version is replaced by the EVO SP. Each bike has fewer kilos and more horses, both advances thanks to revisions of the air-cooled, two-valve-per-head V-twin. Cylinder head changes, new camshaft profiles and higher compression are responsible for the bulk of the 5bhp improvement, giving a claimed peak power output of 95bhp. There’s also a larger airbox inlet, faster ECU, a return to single spark plugs rather than twin and an oil bath under the cams for
more efficient cooling. An 848-style flywheel also saves weight. To cut more flab, the crankcases have been redesigned to hug the gearbox internals more closely, and formed using the latest vacuum casting technology. These alone save a mildly unbelievable 3.2kg. With a magnesium cover over the alternator, which now uses light rare-earth magnets, the complete motor weighs over five bags of Tate & Lyle’s finest less than last year. Factor in lighter engine mounts (machined rather than forged, as on the also-new 796), a lighter wiring loom, clocks borrowed from the Streetfighter and carbon rear panels, and the total reduction is 7kg (dry weight is a claimed 172kg). Updates to create the road-focused 1100 EVO finish here – suspension, geometry and styling are unchanged. But the chassis of the new track-biased SP has further alterations, based on feedback from racers in the Ducati Desmo Challenge and changes to the bike that won the gruelling Pikes Peak Hillclimb in America. The perfectly capable two-piece Brembo radial calipers are swapped for overwhelming monoblocks swiped from the 1198 21
2010 N EW M ETAL
The latest on the remaining new models of 2010
moto guzzi V12 Built around the unmistakable 1200cc V-twin lump and designed to show their commitment to enhancing and developing their flagship engine, this is Moto Guzzi’s V12 concept. The firm has recently benefited from a huge dollop of cash from owners Piaggio, which lets them develop new models, re-organise and increase production. And this project is the first to bear fruit. The concept was created by ex-Ducati man Pierre Terblanche and Aprilia’s on-form Miguel Galluzzi, and there were three versions of the concept at the recent Milan show. The LM is a sportsbike named after the old Le Mans series (above); the Strada, has more upright ergonomics and a pillion seat (above left); 30
and the X (left) is billed as ‘one-of-a-kind’ but is actually something of a supermoto. All share the same cast aluminium frame, monocoque bodywork (which hinges up as one piece for access beneath) and fourvalve, 1151cc, 90° motor. There are some cool details too, like the LCD rear view system instead of mirrors, LED lighting and those curiously appealing heat sinks near the headstock. Moto Guzzi were gauging public reaction at the show in Italy before deciding if the next step is production or three more occupants for the museum. We’re hoping for the former. ‘This is just the first step,’ says Galluzzi. ‘We are back to relying on ideas and we have plenty of them. This is just the beginning.’ Fingers crossed, eh? >>>
front
mOTO GUzzI NORGE GT 8V Guzzi’s charming if mildly lacking tourer benefits from the four-valve-per-cylinder engine from the Griso and 1200 Sport. With new exhausts to suit, there’s an increase in both the claimed power and torque – up just over 8bhp to 103.5bhp at 7500rpm, with torque climbing from 74 to 81 lb.ft. Suspension is sportier thanks to different spring rates and revised damping, while the fairing is revised to offer better protection and better cooling by ducting heat away from the air-cooled engine more efficiently. The clocks are now nearer to the rider as well and there’s a modified centrestand, redesigned for easier operation. S P E C S Price £10,915 Engine 1151cc, 8v, sohc, 90° V-twin Power 103bhp @ 7500rpm (claimed) Top speed 130mph (est) Wet weight 251kg (claimed)
APRILIA DORSODURO FACTORY Aprilia’s handy supermoto is available in Factory form in 2010. The fly-by-wire 750cc V-twin and composite frame of the base Dorsoduro are unchanged, but Aprilia have sprinkled the running gear with updates. The Sachs 43mm upside-down forks are specific to this model, hanging from forged yokes, with longer travel and adjustable preload and rebound damping. Cast fork bottoms hold four-piston Brembo radial calipers, as opposed to Aprilia’s own gold copies on the base model and Shiver, grabbing at wavy discs, and the rear shock is also changed for a fully adjustable gas unit. Carbon fibre replaces some of the plastic bodywork to save weight, with the large tank sides and both mudguards formed in the lightweight weave. An anodised top yoke, alloy bars and a black and red paint scheme complete the changes. S P E C S Price £7625 Engine 750cc. 8v, dohc, 90° V-twin Power 90bhp @ 8750rpm (claimed) Top speed 130mph (est) Wet weight 210kg (est)
SHIVER The seat is now 50mm thinner and a tad nearer to the ground, to make it easier to get a leg down and give better control. The handlebars and footpegs are lower and further back for a more inclined, sportier stance. The rider and pillion pegs are different items too, for ‘an enhanced sporting look’ and the brake discs are now wavy. The cowl is also modified to give a smidge more protection, new colourscheme and large, old-style Aprilia graphics. S P E C S Price £6215 Engine 750cc, 8v, dohc, 90° V-twin Power 95bhp @ 9000rpm (claimed) Top speed 135mph (est) Wet weight 218kg (est)
31
t h e
b i k e
i n t e r V i e w
Toby & Jules
d
r
e
a
m
t e
a
m
Words Gary Inman Photography Chippy Wood Toby Moody bounds up the stairs to the anonymous hotel where I’ve arranged to meet him and the other half of Eurosport’s dynamic commentary duo Julian Ryder. I get the impression Toby bounds everywhere. He has the same tongue-lolling enthusiasm as a one-year-old Red Setter. He’s all firm handshakes, bright eyes and dress, which is best described as finance manager of a medium-sized provincial firm kicking back at the sailing club. Within minutes he’s showing us photos on his iPhone of the Suzuki GSX-R600-powered single-seat hillclimb car he races at his beloved Shelsley Walsh
‘I started commenting at the age of 20,’ explains the 37-year-old Toby. The son of car hillclimb enthusiasts, with a father who commentated over the PA at live races, Toby’s been obsessed with motorsport since he could walk. ‘I picked up a microphone rather than spanners, because I already tried that. For a summer job I was in final assembly at Benetton Formula 1. The following year, for £65 a week, I worked on rally cars at ProDrive. But I wasn’t really very good at it. ‘After asking my dad, he said, “You can commentate, but I’m not doing you any favours.” Someone came up to me after a couple of meetings and said, “I can lie in the grass at the top of the hill with my eyes shut listening to you and I can see everything.” I thought, “That’s it! That’s exactly what I’m trying to do.”’ A few minutes later Toby’s commentary partner Julian Ryder arrives. A bear of a man; short, thick hair; short, thick beard; and, I’m assuming, short, thick, hairy legs. The pair have been the soundtrack of UK GP fans’ weekends for more than a decade. If there’s a GP bike on track anywhere in the world, it’s likely they’re giving an opinion on it for Eurosport. While the BBC’s coverage is excellent, with clever features in the build-up, characterful anchors (I said
50
‘anchors’) and fearless pit-lane paratroopers, the race commentary is set at a level a little too simplistic and repetitive for the GP hardcore. Listen to one of Toby and Jules’ commentaries and you quickly realise they’re genuine fans. And, because they know they’re catering for the hardcore, they take up the roles of King Gnomes, revelling in the tiniest detail, itching to share the most obscure nugget. You get the feeling they’d do the job for nothing. Not what you get from the Beeb. ‘We complement each other,’ says Ryder, talking about the two companies. ‘The anoraks listen to us, some camped on the settee for every session. The Beeb’s show is very high quality, but they can’t devote as much time to it as Eurosport do.’ Rally commentary led Toby to GPs. ‘It was early ’96 when I heard about the opportunity. I thought, “Great, I’ll be number two to the American fella [Dennis Noyes].” Oh no, the job was for the number one. So I went out and learnt about bikes. Very quickly. I’d been to bike races and there’s a photo of me in the family album as a boy with Barry Sheene, but I didn’t know the current scene. I learnt it in a hurry before I went to the interview with Dorna in Spain. They sat me in a booth and said, “Right, commentate on this race.” I only knew about seven names. After two laps they said, “Fine,” and put me
From far left: The book of books for MotoGP stats addicts; A mobile phone and accurate watch are essential tools of the trade; Toby bones up on his race stats, while Jules checks out the sports section. ‘Any more tea in the pot, Toby?’
51
funny fronT ends
The trouble with forks... ...is, in short, almost everything – they’re heavy, complicated and expensive. but we’re stuck with them. or are we? Words Rupert Paul Pinpointing what’s wrong with telescopic forks makes a lot more sense in a classroom than it does on a road, forest trail or racetrack. Some of this can be blamed on 74 years of continuous development. But most of it is down to the fact that, although in theory forks are a dog’s breakfast, in practice they’re very good. Perhaps their biggest advantage is their tendency to dive under braking. Thirty years ago manufacturers and race teams had all manner of anti-dive or pro-squat systems. But braking dive is exactly what you want. Not only does it transfer more weight on to the front tyre at the ideal time, allowing harder braking, it steepens the steering and reduces the trail too – precisely when you want the bike to be at its most flickable. On top of that, forks transmit feel almost directly to the palms of your hands. Nevertheless, the shortcomings are there. It’s just that they’re so enormous they’re built into what we expect of a motorcycle. Whoever heard of a bike without a frame? That was ridiculously cheap and light? That came with several hundred fewer moving parts? If a team of engineers had to invent front suspension today, there’s no way they’d come up with telescopic forks. But evolution has selected them over all the other options. It doesn’t matter that they mix up suspension, steering and braking functions, rely on a friction-prone sliding bearing vulnerable to road grot, and need lots of complication, expense and extra bulk to work properly. They work and that’s that. But only for now... Fork problem #5 they mix up Forces Forks have to deal with the forces involved with braking (and acceleration), suspension movement and steering. Because they all share the load path, the forks need to be large and stiff; worse, hitting a bump can have an adverse effect on steering, heavy braking uses up travel, and so on. Fork problem #6 they’re an expensive compromise Forks bend under braking, which affects their ability to slide smoothly. They also need to control weight transfer as well as shock absorption. And they’ve become complicated bits of precision-engineered kit that can account for 10-20% of a bike’s cost.
90
problem #1 they add weight Forks create immense stress in the steering head, particularly under braking. Thus they need a strong frame to maintain stiffness. Even on a MotoGP bike the frame weighs 6kg or more – at least a stone. problem #2 they mess up weight distribution A headstock and two bulky alloy beams reduce options to move other clutter on the bike closer to the centre of mass. problem #3 they impair airFlow Forks must be stiff and therefore wide. This puts two air dams in front of the radiator. In 2004, Ducati ditched their overheating Desmosedici’s conventional 50mm steel tubes for 42mm carbon fibre ones. Same stiffness, less obstruction. problem #4 they’re unstable When a bike accelerates hard over bumps, or lands a wheelie crossed-up, it can tankslap. Although electronic steering dampers have taken the horror out of the experience, such frolics are not quickly forgotten.
Two dirty great tubes with springs and oil inside clamped together. What’s so wrong with that?
The current alternatives
The funny front end (FFE) world is a lot more complicated than the two broad categories below. But, if you’ll forgive the oversimplification, the following are the systems that could yet rival telescopic forks
BMW Telelever Introduced on the R1100RS in 1993, BMW’s Telelever front suspension went on to dominate their model range throughout the ’90s. Based on a design used by English frame builder Nigel Hill, the system uses two ‘empty’ sliding forks which still steer the bike but contain no springing or damping. Instead, a single shock absorber handles the bumps, mounted off a wishbone connected to a rose joint on a brace between the forks at mudguard height. The rear ends of the wishbone hinge off mounting points above and behind the cylinder head. The system feeds suspension forces into the frame, bypassing steering. This means braking and bumps have no effect over the effort needed to steer, theoretically improving feel, stability and reducing braking distances (although not all riders would agree with the improved feel argument). Other advantages include less unsprung weight, less friction in the forks and, by altering wishbone geometry, chassis designers can tailor the system to dive under braking to make it feel like tele forks.
BMW Duolever Debuted on the K1200S in 2005, Duolever is based on an invention by English chassis designer Norman Hossack. A pair of solid arms, like a vertical swingarm, hinge on two rose joints connected to the frame by short struts. A shock attaches to the bottom strut. Steering is via a scissor joint at the top of the ‘swingarm’. Like Telelever, Duolever splits steering and suspension forces, meaning brake forces, bumps and changes in suspension loading due to cornering (like shutting the throttle mid corner) have no effect on steering. Brake dive and steering geometry are adjustable according to the length and position of components. Some riders find the rigidity of the forks make the front end feel remote in corners. 91