Ducati Sporting Club UK > DesmoDue Race Series > DesmoDue - General Questions and Chat > Desmo Due 2010

[skidlids]

Originally Posted by Ghost

Confused here, I can move my pickup cradle along its slots to give me 10°+ the ignition ignitor boxes will therefore give that 3 to 4° extra advance. These are devices and change the ignition.

If one is using silly advance figures on std fuel we will be seeing a lot of holed pistons and a lot of tinkling noises on the straights.

Or we could just make things a lot more complicated.

Just pointing out there are suggestions being emailed in to relax a rule and another suggestion to tighten up the same rule.
Different riders have differing views

As has been said you can't please everyone

[Ghost]

Originally Posted by skidlids

Just pointing out there are suggestions being emailed in to relax a rule and another suggestion to tighten up the same rule.
Different riders have differing views

As has been said you can't please everyone

I sort of see what you mean Kev, but if I wish to set my ign timing static any where between min and max as much as the cradle will allow, I'm not breaking any rules.

For this rule to be valid you would have to state that every engine is set static at 7° which you and I know, is a nonsense and unprovable.

We need to open things up so riders with inavative ideas can try them as a tutor once told me:- "Always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got". FFS

[skidlids]

Originally Posted by Ghost

We need to open things up so riders with inavative ideas can try them as a tutor once told me:- "Always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got". FFS

Phil my submission is for the rule to be changed
removing the words about the Manufacturers Standard settings
This will then allow people to experiment (mainly at next to no cost) and also reduce the risk of people buying bikes that have had the timing altered and knowing nothing about it and hence breaking the rule unwittingly.

Phil You may also be interested in my suggested changes to the Crankshaft rule
I have submitted a change that includes the phase
"Apart from Dynamic Balancing" inserted after the words No Modifications
This follows the debate earlier in the year and my subsequent questioning of several Ducati engine builders and can see no reason not to allow dynamic balancing and will again stop riders unknowingly breaking that rule

[Ghost]

Originally Posted by skidlids

Phil my submission is for the rule to be changed
removing the words about the Manufacturers Standard settings
This will then allow people to experiment (mainly at next to no cost) and also reduce the risk of people buying bikes that have had the timing altered and knowing nothing about it and hence breaking the rule unwittingly.

Phil You may also be interested in my suggested changes to the Crankshaft rule
I have submitted a change that includes the phase
"Apart from Dynamic Balancing" inserted after the words No Modifications
This follows the debate earlier in the year and my subsequent questioning of several Ducati engine builders and can see no reason not to allow dynamic balancing and will again stop riders unknowingly breaking that rule

Good news on the crank balancing aspect. But knife edging will be outlawed, but impossible to prove without having a barrell off at the very least.

Mine isn't knife edged by the way.