👋 I did miss talking about the pulses in the firing order allowing the tyre to recover for a crossplane I4. I also made a few minor mistakes on balancing between flatplane crank vs crossplane crank with regards to their primary and secondary balances. The feedback is appreciated and I will take it onboard and make better videos! Sorry about that all :)
Good video. since you cramped in too much in there, forgot to mention v also reduces the chance of torque twisting at crank level that helps V4 to make more torque allowing them to exit corner way better than inline4.
V4 engines been shorter helps reducing the aero drag and have more room to play guiding the radiator cooling airflow to the exit. The V4 engines shape helps with the mounting points of the frame, now engines are used as structural part of the overall bike strength, not just a holding weight to screw. So design a frame thinking about the resistance to bending and torsional forces using the engine as a part of frame structure, the v shape make engineers life easier. Big role in V4 advantage is the weight distribution, having the 4 cylinders so close to the front wheel isn't the same that having two of them in the center of the bike. Same as cars middle engine have taken the advantage over front mounted ones for so many years when it comes to lap time machines. There's some exceptions like the 911 or some crazy FWD Lemans proto but... Almost anything in racing designed cars have the engines mounted between the center and the back.
Yamaha already builds the worlds most powerful V4 ! The VMAX...... With a different firing concept to those mentioned You didnt mention the RC45 or Panegali either...... All those fire 2 cylinders at the same time turning the v4 onto a 4 cylinder V twin in effect....... gaining midrange torque, for corner exits ( they sound AWSOME as well ) RC 45 sounds nothing like an RC 30. Did you ever wonder why the RC45 sounded more like a Ducati... Honda vfr RC36v (1997 only) ROAD BIKE has 2 piece Cams so you can rotate each half 180° to "twin fire" your motor to make it run like an RC45......a 4 cylinder V twin...... I know as I own one ( factory Green, only year VFR750 was in that colour) and have done it to my bike, and will never change it back ! The change is dramatic, the hp increase and torque curve change is astonishing compared to standard. No less rideable, and more tractable down low, more "brutal" in accelleration
Little old suzuki did great before they got pushed out the door with an inline and yamaha dominated until they stopped spending money in motogp and rolled over and played dead!
@@jake88ci Suzuki used to run a V4. Before they quit GP the first time they raced the GSV-R with a V4 that varied from 60-65 degree V angle depending on the year. The bike was not initially competitive, but towards the end of its run was capable of winning the odd race. When they came back they switched to a crossplane crank I4 and at times it was very fast. At one point they were even out dragging the Ducatis down the front straight in Qatar but they were probably stressing the engines too much as they were never quite that fast in later races, likely detuned a little to make them last the season. Still faster than the Yamahas. The big issue now is all the aero and active suspension has allowed the V4s, mainly the Ducatis handle well enough that their power advantage far out weighs the Yamaha's handling advantages. Get rid of the aero and active ride height adjustment and I bet the Yamahas would be competitive again as the Ducatis would struggle to put the power down.
1 note, a flat plane i4 ALSO has perfect primary balance. It's the secondary balance where it struggles a bit. The cross plane i4 has HORRIBLE primary balance and the same bad secondary balance of the flat plane. This requires it to have balance shafts and extra counter weights and THAT is why YAMAHA's i4 is heavier than a v4 engine. Flat plane i4 engines do not have that problems and are significantly more powerful than Yamaha's i4 motors. the reason yamaha went for the crossplane is the odd firing interval that is similar to a shared pin v4. By spacing the power strokes at irregular intervals with bigger silence gaps allows a more easily manageable power delivery both by the riders and the rear tire. As the tire has very limited capacity for grip, the gaps in power delivery allow it to recover better. That's an issue that comes from the delayed elasticity of tire rubber called hysteresis, it causes the rubber to have a delay in going back to its normal shape after leaving contact with the road. Put too much load on the tire too fast and it's over, you lost grip. An i4 engine, aka a screamer, has NO POWER GAPS and it will easily break grip, shared pin v4 engines and yamaha's cross plane have big gaps that allow the tire to recover. In terms of power, a v4 with separate crank pins for each piston CAN work with the same power delivery of a screamer engine as they can be set in a way that it fires every 180° like an i4. THAT v4 would completely blow the other v4 engines out of the water with its power. My question is, would that v4 lose its balance?
@@jefferson2214 apart from the tire thing, the rest were things I read before I discovered the video you mentioned. Some people do like to look things up and know a thing or two. The fact that you have a crossplane is irrelevant to me.
Great breakdown Vas! I can see a few points I missed that should be in there for sure. I know for next time :) In all honesty I wonder if other teams and manufacturers have explored that in the past. There must be a reason why something like what you said hasn't been done yet. Maybe we'll see it in the future
@@absolutedan9173 which one? The v4 with individual pins for each piston? It would defeat the purpose of the conventional v4 which is the irregular firing intervals. There's no point in making power if you can't use it. An even firing v4 would be like a flat plane i4 on steroids. Lower friction, lower inertia, lower pumping losses with the same power delivery? They'll be insane.
@@vasilisgreen every thing, point from point is parroted from his famous video, but yes, there are people who knew about it before he made that video. Good luck in league of legends
Half of the information in this vid is straight up lies. Having a longer moment of inertia gives more vibration and less handling. The V4 is not more powerful, what it does is spread out the power pulses so the tire can "relax" and recover grip, since power has already hit a ceiling in moto gp, where more power wouldnt be a benefit since bikes have problems putting it to the ground. Also V4s do NOT have perfect primary balance, I4 DO have it. V4s have perfect SECONDARY balance, which does help with revs. V4s also have cooling problems and are definetely LESS compact if you count the independent intakes and everything. Also the concept of moment of inertia being good is true, but not applicable here since the crank spins on itself, not around the bike. Having more mass on the sides is good, but doest have to do with the crank spinning.
holy crap, you're probably the most underrated analysis moto guy ive ever seen. your production level is much better than most of other channels, keep it up!
Thanks mate! Glad you liked the video. I did miss a few bits out as others have pointed out so I need to make sure i get some better reviewing techiniques but it's getting there :)
The V4 is narrower yes but to my understanding the radiators are the limiting factor in the width of the bike or how narrow they can be. But you are correct the ending itself is a lot narrower
@@absolutedan9173 bikes designed for race applications can have side mounted or rear cooling as ram air can be utilised, even though some road bikes follow this principle.
I can attest that the Wisconsin V-4 absolutely dominated back in the ‘50’s when we used it on a John Deere hay baler and a wooden tanked orchard sprayer.
Your analysis is a logical fallacy. You can't just claim that V4 is lighter without presenting the actual weight. The longer crankshaft of I-4 and crankshaft bracing is nothing compared to the V4 twin heads and the extra two camshafts in it. Also v4 has smaller engine size in term of what? It is smaller from side to side but not front to back. Designing a frame with I-4 is easier, you can make the cylinder head stand up or lower and you can move CG further to the front than V4.
Euhm... logical fallacy? Twin heads in the V4... Bloke.. These "twin heads" on the V4 are two heads of each two cylinders, but the single head of the inline four is one combined head for 4 cilinders... In other words: in both cases you have 4 "1 cylinder" heads for 4 cylinders, the amount of material in both setups should be roughly the same... On the crackshaft however the amount of material really is less in the V4.
@@rientsdijkstra4266 read again my original post and when you're done read it again from the start. Then we can conclude that you never built an engine.
@@anggaros1 Bro I dont't take orders from you. You mistakenly forgot that cylinderheads are determined by the cylinder and that for four cylinders you will always four cylinder-heads, no matter if these are spread over one "cast" or over two "casts". "Heaving built an engine" is completely irrelevant. You where wrong. Period.
Im not convinced that the V4 is the ultimate motor...example A Honda Real GP racing is "sights and sounds" so different configurations are encouraged...you dont want inline 4s going away or yourvgoing away from what GP is all about.
2 little complements: The reason for the 90° degree crank is that it creates a irregular firing order, which gives a bigger recovery window to the rear tire (the tire has more time to care about cornering when it is not „stressed“ by the ignition strokes), which improves traction during corner exit. In a race bike, the center of gravity should not be as low as possible. A high center of gravity gives advantages in cornering. With the same leaning angle, you can compensate more centrifugal force when the center of gravity is higher. A higher center of gravity is bad for acceleration, because the tendency of doing a wheelie is higher, but this is compensated by the different lowering devices.
Good feedback and points. I forgot to include the recovery window in the video candidly. I did also do a review on the holeshot and ride height devices as well :)
Great content mate - thank you. Maybe invest in a mic to avoid the "echo" effect in your audio track. Just a minor thing. Keep doing what you're doing and this channel will grow.
Thanks Joseph, I appreciate the feedback. Ironically I have a mic already believe it or not I just don't have anything in the room to absorb the noise :D - I will be investing in some better production items soon :)
Great vid and analysis! An excellent point on how all this racing is just a marketing exercise. Suzuki left MotoGP cause it wasnt profitable, they make more in ATV and Boat engine sales than they do on motorcycles (at least in North America). Yamaha is just holding on, there isnt really a reason for them to spend all that addition mkney on developing a new engine when they probably outsell Ducati and KTM with their piano sales ahah. Subbed
Thanks mate! Glad you like the video and thanks for the feedback. I always want to make sure i keep getting better, the video wasn't perfect but they are getting better each time i post. Is there anything you'd like to see in the future?
The moment of inertia argument doesn't wash. The v4s typically have an external flywheel which allows them to tweak engine inertia for each track, so it would be easy for them to increase it and match the inline 4s. All motogp bikes also run their engines backwards to cancel out the wheel inertia, Ie to reduce overall inertia.
Fair point. This part of the video came from the research I had done but it might not have been fully accurate with modern tech now. I'll do some more research on it :)
Note: KTM officially states that its motoGP V engine is almost 90° without saying the exact angle. The search for maximum compactness is probable without losing the advantages of this configuration.
In my opinion, the motogp's decision to standardise the ecu in 2016 helped ducati immensely. On the other hand, it hurt Honda the most and then Yamaha.
Yes. The electronics magneti marelli were familiar with ducati for a long time and most of their engineers are in ducati and helped manage the electronics, where as japs could not get such expertise and lost way. Ducati was no where near the japs without the magneti marelli.
@@radhamanohar2307 Honda had a torque sensor that allowed their own R&D ECU electronics to control more and support a more sophisticated physics model. The standard ECU doesn't do that so puts everyone on the same lower level IMHO.. Not aware of the Yamaha GP situation, though their production ECU/IMU/TC is so good that tyres that wouldn't pass a road MOT test can still go quite fast on circuit, i.e. the IMU/TC is able to overcome the limitations to a considerable degree. That suggests a serious capability on the electronics, above the standard ECU used now.
OH ..!!!! Another Japanese bike supporter ........crying their little hearts out !!!...Get a life ...!!!!!,,,There is many more Ducati victories coming ...!!!
From my understanding, the crossplane inline 4 in the Yamaha has worst primary and secondary balance and less power than a flatplane inline 4. The advantage of the crossplane inline 4 are the interrupted power pulses that are presented to the rear tire. The interrupted power pulses allow the tire to rest more in between power pulses vs a flatplane inline 4's even power pulses which don't allow the tire to rest. A 90 degree V4's firing order doesn't have even power pulses and the interrupted power pulses are one of the advantages of a 90 degree V4. Also, an inline 4 has a weight distribution advantage because a lot of the weight is over the front wheels which helps with front end traction where a V4 is compromised because only half of it's weight is over the front wheels which compromises front end traction. Honda is using a V4 in their MotoGP bike but as you can see, they're not doing that well. Ducati's advantage is the aero work, which keeps the front end planted under acceleration, they've been working on for the past decade that has finally paid off.
I have never read a peer reviewed ASME Engineering paper that proves a V4 can be more powerful than an inline-4. Or the other myth, that the V4 has better torque, and a better power band. Arguably the V4 can have more optimal flywheel affect - but again, an inline- 4 crankshaft can be designed with the same flywheel inertia. As for the size of the respective lumps - both architectures have problems squeezing into a motorcycle frame. The width of the inline-4 is not a deal killer. The M1 and GSX-RR are only a few mm wider. It's the rider drag that is more important. Why are the V4's proving the better answer at the moment ~ because that's where the big $$$ are being spent by better Engineers and their computers.
I've always favored the I3 - mostly because the sound is amazing. I miss the 20v of the older Yamaha R1. They just seemed to react better to throttle inputs. Can we expect v5s becoming common in the future. I think this is possible. 🤔
How does the inline crank flex more if it sits on bearings in the middle? It's not like there's only two bearings at the ends and that's the endofit... This doesnt make any sense...
Nice video but you forgot to mention the 2nd harmonic of the inline 4 and the fact that the Yamaha R1 uses a counterbalance shaft to stop that problem. That increases the overall crankshaft mass & friction, robbing power.
The reason V4s are successful right now, is because they are in the bikes with the best aero and electronic packages It's nothing to do with the engine config, as the huge number of Inline 4 race wins and WC's over the last 20 years prove.
i always thought honda has an Inline 4 in their gp bike... can you explain why they then have these power struggles compared to rest of the v4's? Is it just missing in experience in R&D?
Honda are the market leader and can lead in R&D too. It's not the peak power that determines the outcome rather how the power is made across the rev range. It's complex physics with the bike leant over and getting on the power out of the corner. So suspension and tyre grip limit what the engine can achieve...
please do more videos about bike's engines and for smaller cc's engines too like 150cc. im saving money to open bike repair shop and still learning about their engines from small to big cc
Nice video, but there is nothing inherently different in the ability to create power in a V vs Inline engine. In fact, if you consider the potential cooling disadvantage of the rear two cylinders it actually has a slight hill to climb
Wow, what an awesome vid! There's so much absolute junk out there on the internet and what an excellent explanation especially for the Motogp newb. I instantly subscribed! Best of luck on your channel, you're a great presenter.
Glad to have found a young channel with lot of potential! I always enjoy seeing the evolution of interesting channels! And to add to the topic, I. A Yamaha fan and no matter if they win or loose I always gonna love that inline4 crossplane engine!
“The design of a V4 allows it to be supplied in an overall better package wich is lighter and also able to produce a lot more of power than an inline 4 cylinder.. “ is this a technical explanation? I think you should try harder as this IMHO is not much of an argument. For example, please explain how a more complex engine (V4) with more parts (two cylinder heads, two distributions and so on) is supposed to be lighter.
I think the V4 has an unexpected bonus as it is balanced front and rear and acts like a stabilizer - gyroscope 4 cylinders in a bank with crank rotation, can't match that effect Because the riders are pushing everything to a radical extreme, that effect, becomes very substantial
Yet Yamaha has won waaaaay more races and championships than Ducati and only Marc was able to do anything with the Honda since Dani left the series. People act like it’s been a decade since Yamaha was winning. They literally have 1 bad season and everyone acts like they are some background team with completely obsolete equipment. It’s bizarre since Ducati went soooo much longer with a riders championship
3:14 This is not necessarily true. Crossplane I4 has worse primary balance than a flatplane. The only benefit to a crossplane is the power gaps which allow the rear tyre "recovery intervals".
Something not mentioned is the crossplane R1 production engine requires a balance shaft, inevitably this is a drag on power and of course adds weight and heat load. Not sure anyone outside of Yamaha knows if the M1 has a balance shaft but I suspect it must for the same reasons as the R1. OTOH if it turned in the opposite direction to the crank it might mitigate the inertia of the longer I4 crank somewhat. Where the crossplane excels is in the transfer of kinetic energy from one cylinder to its neighboring cylinder (as one reaches TDC or BDC the next one is at maximum piston speed). But the V4 has a similar trait, compared to a standard 180 degree V4.
@@carlosandleon exactly the opposite. If you map out the power pulses over 720 degrees of the crank, and compare to a normal 180 degree crank you will see the difference.
An interesting view, and goes partway to explaining the fundamental differences between the V4 MotoGP bikes, and the in-line fours. But you don't tell the whole story, and I feel these other aspects are worth mentioning. Firstly, whereas the in-line four has a longer crankshaft, and more main bearings (as you say) it also requires a balance shaft (or two) when fired like a 90 degree V engine (as mentiond by Vasilis below). (This is because the cross-plane in-line four may well FIRE like a V-twin, but its forces aren't in the different directions of the 'real' V4). This is where the extra rotational weight comes in for the 'crossplane' four, and often one balance shaft (of two) is required to rotate at greater than engine speed, bringing in other inertial and physical limitations. The second point is that, although the Yamaha engine is "larger" in terms of width, it is also shorter/smaller front-to-rear, allowing for a longer swing arm, and attendant suspension and power-delivery advantages. It also has its mass 'centralised' more than the V4, when viewed from side on, making it easier to position the COM closer to ideally, in terms of height, and front/rear. The third aspect you didn't include is the 70 degree(?) offset between the two side-by-side 'V2s' of the V4 Ducati configuration, introduced about seven years ago, and shared with Aprilia in recent years, and no doubt associated with Aprilia's improved performance in the last two years. The Ducati road V4s share this design, with its claimed benefits in tyre 'loading', heat and wear. But of course this design does not share crankpins between the two paired cylinders, as they are slightly offset. A dynamic cutaway diagram of the Ducati engine in your video briefly shows this characteristic. So there is 'far more to this than meets the eye', and a second video covering these subtler aspects may be worth attempting. But thanks for this video - it has helped people understand this perplexing topic, and warrants a follow-up to 'flesh out the detail'. This initial video could serve as an introduction to a subject more complex than first described. As to the R1 road model - apparently this model is being dropped by Yamaha next year, so the race bike's connecton to their road model may be changing, and rumour has it that Yamaha DO have a V4 engine for their GP campaign. Johnny Rea's not enjoying the crossplane Yamaha superbike as much as his (conventional in-line four) Kawasaki at this point, and poor old Quartararo has risked his neck for many years trying to win on it in MotoGP. Honda followed Ducati from a 75 degree 'V' to a similar 90 degree years ago, but without (as far as we know...) the 70 degree offset between the two 'sides'. That may be next year's Honda, if they want Marc back! Hang onto your patents, Ducati...
In a 90 degree V engine the primary forces produced by the pistons moving back and forth act as a pure rotating mas, therefore it is easy to balance this force with an excentric mass in the crankshaft.
I’m surprised you didn’t discuss how Ducati ‘s v4 is different from the others and how Ducati lobbied motogp for a rules change to give them a power advantage. This Ducati’s dominance
the thing is, most of the v4 now, with the help of aero devices have similar racing line to inline 4, with the more power, it will launch itself faster than inline 4. electronic have major part in it too. I dont think inline 4 will have any chance rn, unless the motogp really goes back to 800cc ish that have been rumour
Could very well be. If they do drop the cc again it would be really interesting to see what Yamaha decides to do. I wonder as well will they even stay in MotoGP?
800cc was a disaster and cost of an entirely new bike is absurd .HONda will want 800cc to pressout small euro manufacturers ... honda= worst engineers in motogp so have dorna hinder penalize better manufacturers
I like using telemetry to advance my performance and you said it right,if they switch,then they would have to start with a blank file of telemetry for engine parameters. No previous data to load,overlap,analyze and go from. Yes,i'm really interested what will they do. Anyway,good video,nicely explained,recommendable. Cheers!
I think you mean Data Logging, i.e. recording data on many sensors as the bike travels, for subsequent analysis. Telemetry means sending data from a vehicle, potentially making adjustments to some parameters and that's not legal in bike racing. Formula One does that but the capability is regulated and probably the reason why the driver has so many controls on the steering wheel. On bikes the buttons are likely to support control of traction control, e.g. Aprilia RSV-4, or alternate ignition maps/modes, e.g. Rain or Dry, where the rider can choose as they ride. Having spare attention for much more than that is hard at racing speeds and has the potential for disaster beyond a missed gear shift.
I think you missed a key advantage of the V4 (unless I missed you say it). You mentioned it is smaller and allows it to be moved to the right location for vehicle dynamics but the key advantage is that it's significantly narrower, which has a huge advantage on the bike's aerodynamic drag force and also allows the fairings to be made in different shapes for aero efficiency and potentially downforce.
@4:21 ''A V4 engine also creates less friction because it only operates on 3 main bearings instead of the minimum of 5 that are required by an inline four''. Which means a V4 has 6 main bearings, 3 for each crank. ...Would you mind rephrasing that?
a 3 cylinder has it's place. If they change the regs in 2027 we might see somethign like this! Would be pretty interesting and being able to have the best of both worlds
(Perhaps) less crank bearings in a V4, but more cam bearings, along with more potential weight from the two extra cams and one extra cylinder head. I also can’t see why a V4 would produce more power than an inline four or flat four. V4s main benefit is that it’s narrower.
I don't care much about Moto GP....I chose a big 1200 V4 in my bike when the "Moto GP" was still racing 500cc 2-strokers. Now, nearly 40 years later that Yamaha VMax enginewise is still a piece of art, even though I bought the 1700cc V4 VMax aside of it. V4 in bikes is like a V8 in cars. Emotionalwise.
You should probably make a link to the Honda five cylinder V5 video you made in the description. I was all set to suggest you make that video and then you already did.
Yes, ur right bro, it's been a long time that yamaha that shines their cross plane technology, and it is very hard to jump up in v4 and waste money for nothing like a scrap, the better way for Yamaha is to maintain and improve their gp bike for future racing and it can sold affordable
Its probably been pointed out but Honda's motoGP has a V4 but their road bikes have inline 4's Yamaha can go to a V4 in motogp as well, but its more likely that they wont because of the other reasons listed rather then marketing
@@kanebaker4294 A VFR in a sportier frame or even naked bike would be MONEY i would sell my soul for one of those!! trying to find a VFR/intercepter is such a pain they are super rare around my area gotta go to like cali or something but now that i looked not that much money for one but 3500 for a bike with 75,000 miles...like yeah its a honda but...oooof that would be pushing it for me...though its an 02' so still gear driven cams i think so that'd be money as well...great now i need one hahaha
hold up, hold up. are you telling me a I4 Crossplane vibrates less than a I4 Flatplane? Isn't the flat plane perfectly primarily balanced, unlike the cross plane that has neither perfect primary nor secondary balance, but is better at handling for the larger recovery gaps between engine pulses transfered to the tyre?
You are right. A fair few people mentioned this to me and It's something I'm going to make a couple of notes on in the video description. It's all good feedback
@@absolutedan9173 ...just looking at some of your other content. Love the LMH v LMDh overview, and the Baggers vlog is excellent 👌 ...something around the different Rally classes could be interesting. ...R1 v R2, R3 v R4 etc
i think the ducati v4 engine also uses reverse rotating engine compared to conventionally used, so when you open fully the trottle then it help ceeping the front wheel down,, and this allow giving more trottle before wheeleing. aka lift of of frontwheel. You notis this sitting on a bmw boxer engine opening the trottle, then the mass of the crank pull the bike to the left. by accellerating mass from the crank.
I think the point is not only winning the race, they need to win the market as well. IMO on top of the reasons given in this video, a bike with i4 engine has certain 'bigger/wider' looks to it compared to slim bike with V2/V4 which some people said it looks very menacing and they like it. For me personally it's about the heat management as my country can be very hot some time and having a furious engine right below my seat would make for very unpleasant ride. So yeah, despite V4 dominating the race, I'm glad that Yamaha sticking to their i4.
I own a 99 blade and a 2001 vfr800fi , obviously early days of v4 and 100cc less ,inline four blade lighter as well so counter to current v4 dominance.Had a 2000 Vtr1000f as well until last year just to compare all three(very torquey)
I'm not sure that v4 are lighter than 4 in line. On the contrary, v4 have 2 blocks of cylinder head instead of 1. That's a lot heavier (with also 2 cam drive devices).
the weight advantage is small and kinda irrelevant cause as you know the rules have a min weight. also a main plus for v4s is that because they have less width engineers often install exterior adjustable engine parts that can change from race to race according to track needs. its a lets say window to the rules. but above all as we saw inline 4 can be competitve but that idiotic rule with standard ecus that are made from an Italian company suited for v4s its totally anti racing...
I don't believe that a V4 allows an engine to be lighter given that they have 2 cylinder heads each with a total of more cam bearings and 4 sides instead of two . Also the inline crank makes it easier to "turn in" with the revolving weights end t
Imagine if Suzuki still in there? Suzuki was the perfect race bike which can itself preserve tyres... That last corner move by Rins on Suzuki at 2019 BritishGP can't be done by a bike rather than Suzuki...
Yamaha is probably betting everything on the 2027 rule changes. They're most likely hoping for aero restrictions that will place the i4's better turning ability back at the front.
Given the two different riding styles need for the two engines, it would seem like another big factor would be tires and the maximum grip level the tire can provide under any given conditions. With the inline four utilizing higher cornering speeds it would seem to be at a disadvantage with tires that provide less gripe overall, whereas the V4 is get in fast get out fast where the bike is more upright when on the brakes/throttle and slower when leaned over, which would appear to be better given the same low grip tires. Hearing tons of complaints from the Japanese riders about lack of grip. So is the V4 and the associated riding style just able to utilize the Michelin tires better?
I don't think you know as much as you think you do! V4's are not "smaller" than I4's, they are just narrower, allowing the bike to be narrower and giving better packaging options. The engines occupy the same volume in space (in fact, the V4 will occupy MORE space because it has two valve trains, double the cam chains etc). It's just the space it occupies is in a better place. I also think it's very arguable that V4's produce more power! Not necessarily, this is not an intrinsic attribute of a V4 design! I4's dominate the horsepower battle in cars, what hot hatch did you ever hear of that had a V4? There is no reason that with enough money and R&D an i4 bike could not dominate Motogp again, and/or produce the most hp. Yamaha have announced the R1 is being discontinued and they will probably withdraw from MotoGP also. So that's another reason they won't spend the money to go V4.
@tosgem I'm always careful about the myth.... "an inline-4 crank is too long /heavy for the horsepower = too much flex/ vibration" The most powerful engine ever in F1 was the 1983 BMW 1,499cc M12/13 turbocharged inline-4. Unlimited boost! 1,400bhp. 933bhp/liter (!) Way more overstressed than the MotoGP Yamaha normally aspirated 1,000cc inline-4 @ only 300bhp/liter. And the BMW's crank was not a problem. As a licensed Mechanical Engineer, I know that an inline-4 can be designed to be just as powerful as a V4. It's just a matter of crank and block bearing design. The spacing of the main bearing journals being the most important. I cannot remember the M1 being a hand grenade - only that smokey Rossi blow up at Mugello. So, it's not a crank problem, eh? What I think it is ~ that Yamaha have not spent the $$ on research to develop the I4 engine. Combustion chamber, Pistons, Cam, Valves, Ignition etc. Or, they just do not have the brilliant engine technology that the Italians have at the moment. I betcha Gigi and crew, KTM and Aprilia could build a powerful inline-4. But that's not what they sell. After all, MOTOGP is all about advertising what you sell. Why Yamaha will never build a V4. They don't have a V4 crotch rocket in the showroom to sell. They are pushing their weird crankshaft!
Power = torque X RPM. Torque is a function of how efficiently the cylinder is filled with air, and how efficiently the fuel-air mixture is burned. Cylinder arrangement has absolutely nothing to do with power... (therefore the statement @ 0:39 in this video is completely false)... I'm wondering where the author of this video got his mechanical engineering degree???
MotoGP is lagging behind in technology. At this point we should be exploring forced induction engines. You can buy economy cars with turbos! There is no reason why we can’t have tiny small-displacement engines that produce the same kind of performance numbers. Imagine a tiny 500 cc 3 cylinder engine making 300 + bhp. It CAN be done. I e mentioned this many times, and have always been criticized. “We already tried turbo’s,” they exclaim. Yes- but that was also the analog era. With modern computing tech, we can sort all of that out. MotoGP should be more like the OLD F1. Imagination and creative engineering should be at the forefront. Two-strokes can burn cleaner than four-strokes today! Allow it! Let the genius’s run wild, man!
👋 I did miss talking about the pulses in the firing order allowing the tyre to recover for a crossplane I4. I also made a few minor mistakes on balancing between flatplane crank vs crossplane crank with regards to their primary and secondary balances. The feedback is appreciated and I will take it onboard and make better videos! Sorry about that all :)
Good video. since you cramped in too much in there, forgot to mention v also reduces the chance of torque twisting at crank level that helps V4 to make more torque allowing them to exit corner way better than inline4.
V4 engines been shorter helps reducing the aero drag and have more room to play guiding the radiator cooling airflow to the exit.
The V4 engines shape helps with the mounting points of the frame, now engines are used as structural part of the overall bike strength, not just a holding weight to screw. So design a frame thinking about the resistance to bending and torsional forces using the engine as a part of frame structure, the v shape make engineers life easier.
Big role in V4 advantage is the weight distribution, having the 4 cylinders so close to the front wheel isn't the same that having two of them in the center of the bike. Same as cars middle engine have taken the advantage over front mounted ones for so many years when it comes to lap time machines. There's some exceptions like the 911 or some crazy FWD Lemans proto but... Almost anything in racing designed cars have the engines mounted between the center and the back.
Yamaha already builds the worlds most powerful V4 !
The VMAX......
With a different firing concept to those mentioned
You didnt mention the RC45 or Panegali either......
All those fire 2 cylinders at the same time turning the v4 onto a 4 cylinder V twin in effect....... gaining midrange torque, for corner exits
( they sound AWSOME as well )
RC 45 sounds nothing like an
RC 30.
Did you ever wonder why the RC45 sounded more like a Ducati...
Honda vfr RC36v (1997 only) ROAD BIKE has 2 piece Cams so you can rotate each half 180° to "twin fire" your motor to make it run like an RC45......a 4 cylinder V twin......
I know as I own one ( factory Green, only year VFR750 was in that colour)
and have done it to my bike, and will never change it back !
The change is dramatic, the hp increase and torque curve change is astonishing compared to standard.
No less rideable, and more tractable down low, more "brutal" in accelleration
What a can of worms.
Subject is more complex than this presentación.
Many errors.
@@Marc_Remillard What do you mean ? most powerful. I thought it was like 120hp is it not ?
Meanwhile honda:
-Sells flagship inline4
-Race a V4 GP bike
-Not competitive in GP
-Fireblade sales still up
If Honda would get a V4 Fireblade out the door I think they would sell
@@pepperidgefarmsremembers92 I'd camp out at my local Honda dealer to get mine.
To be fair that bike is probably more about doing well in WSB
Because honda bikes are pretty reliable!
Honda is a religion... you cant stop the brainwashed zealots...
Little old suzuki did great before they got pushed out the door with an inline and yamaha dominated until they stopped spending money in motogp and rolled over and played dead!
Suzuki quit because they had to invest in new models.
You're on to something...
@@carlosandleon suzukineeded v-4 the inline 4 was blowing engines
Suzuki has been playing dead since mid 2000’s
@@jake88ci Suzuki used to run a V4. Before they quit GP the first time they raced the GSV-R with a V4 that varied from 60-65 degree V angle depending on the year. The bike was not initially competitive, but towards the end of its run was capable of winning the odd race. When they came back they switched to a crossplane crank I4 and at times it was very fast. At one point they were even out dragging the Ducatis down the front straight in Qatar but they were probably stressing the engines too much as they were never quite that fast in later races, likely detuned a little to make them last the season. Still faster than the Yamahas. The big issue now is all the aero and active suspension has allowed the V4s, mainly the Ducatis handle well enough that their power advantage far out weighs the Yamaha's handling advantages. Get rid of the aero and active ride height adjustment and I bet the Yamahas would be competitive again as the Ducatis would struggle to put the power down.
From someone who spent nine years at one of the big four, that was a very informative and accurate video, excellent.
Thanks mate! Glad you liked the video. I've seen a few comments pointing out a few mistakes in the vid so hopefully they weren't too offputting :D
1 note, a flat plane i4 ALSO has perfect primary balance. It's the secondary balance where it struggles a bit. The cross plane i4 has HORRIBLE primary balance and the same bad secondary balance of the flat plane. This requires it to have balance shafts and extra counter weights and THAT is why YAMAHA's i4 is heavier than a v4 engine. Flat plane i4 engines do not have that problems and are significantly more powerful than Yamaha's i4 motors. the reason yamaha went for the crossplane is the odd firing interval that is similar to a shared pin v4. By spacing the power strokes at irregular intervals with bigger silence gaps allows a more easily manageable power delivery both by the riders and the rear tire. As the tire has very limited capacity for grip, the gaps in power delivery allow it to recover better. That's an issue that comes from the delayed elasticity of tire rubber called hysteresis, it causes the rubber to have a delay in going back to its normal shape after leaving contact with the road. Put too much load on the tire too fast and it's over, you lost grip. An i4 engine, aka a screamer, has NO POWER GAPS and it will easily break grip, shared pin v4 engines and yamaha's cross plane have big gaps that allow the tire to recover. In terms of power, a v4 with separate crank pins for each piston CAN work with the same power delivery of a screamer engine as they can be set in a way that it fires every 180° like an i4. THAT v4 would completely blow the other v4 engines out of the water with its power. My question is, would that v4 lose its balance?
just say u watched d4a's video.....btw I have a crossplane
@@jefferson2214 apart from the tire thing, the rest were things I read before I discovered the video you mentioned. Some people do like to look things up and know a thing or two. The fact that you have a crossplane is irrelevant to me.
Great breakdown Vas! I can see a few points I missed that should be in there for sure. I know for next time :)
In all honesty I wonder if other teams and manufacturers have explored that in the past. There must be a reason why something like what you said hasn't been done yet. Maybe we'll see it in the future
@@absolutedan9173 which one? The v4 with individual pins for each piston? It would defeat the purpose of the conventional v4 which is the irregular firing intervals. There's no point in making power if you can't use it. An even firing v4 would be like a flat plane i4 on steroids. Lower friction, lower inertia, lower pumping losses with the same power delivery? They'll be insane.
@@vasilisgreen every thing, point from point is parroted from his famous video, but yes, there are people who knew about it before he made that video. Good luck in league of legends
That crossplane noise is just unbeatable, its heavenly at WOT.
The more I listen to them the more I love them
Wot at the top of 6th. @ around 190 mph the r1 sounds absolutely incredible. Especially with a short can like my racefit. It's truly incredible
I've been wanting an R1 with the cross-plane engine for years but I've too much invested into my ZX10R to make the jump.
@@WayneSmith-zx3tf ull never go back to the kawi
Nah. Aprilia V4 with a GP exhaust sounds the best.
Half of the information in this vid is straight up lies. Having a longer moment of inertia gives more vibration and less handling. The V4 is not more powerful, what it does is spread out the power pulses so the tire can "relax" and recover grip, since power has already hit a ceiling in moto gp, where more power wouldnt be a benefit since bikes have problems putting it to the ground. Also V4s do NOT have perfect primary balance, I4 DO have it. V4s have perfect SECONDARY balance, which does help with revs. V4s also have cooling problems and are definetely LESS compact if you count the independent intakes and everything. Also the concept of moment of inertia being good is true, but not applicable here since the crank spins on itself, not around the bike. Having more mass on the sides is good, but doest have to do with the crank spinning.
But why does inline 4 yamaha did not have a win for a long time?
I owned a 1983 Honda VF750F. It was Honda's original V4 design for racing.
holy crap, you're probably the most underrated analysis moto guy ive ever seen. your production level is much better than most of other channels, keep it up!
Thanks mate! Glad you liked the video. I did miss a few bits out as others have pointed out so I need to make sure i get some better reviewing techiniques but it's getting there :)
Shame about the conclusions
Did I miss it? What about aerodynamics? Isn’t the V4 narrower? That should help tremendously
The V4 is narrower yes but to my understanding the radiators are the limiting factor in the width of the bike or how narrow they can be. But you are correct the ending itself is a lot narrower
@@absolutedan9173 Better tyres enable insane lean angles require narrower engines.
@@absolutedan9173 bikes designed for race applications can have side mounted or rear cooling as ram air can be utilised, even though some road bikes follow this principle.
I can attest that the Wisconsin V-4 absolutely dominated back in the ‘50’s when we used it on a John Deere hay baler and a wooden tanked orchard sprayer.
Your analysis is a logical fallacy. You can't just claim that V4 is lighter without presenting the actual weight. The longer crankshaft of I-4 and crankshaft bracing is nothing compared to the V4 twin heads and the extra two camshafts in it. Also v4 has smaller engine size in term of what? It is smaller from side to side but not front to back. Designing a frame with I-4 is easier, you can make the cylinder head stand up or lower and you can move CG further to the front than V4.
Absolutely, I thought hang on that can't be right, a V4 made out of similar materials has got to be heavier than an in line 4.
Euhm... logical fallacy? Twin heads in the V4... Bloke.. These "twin heads" on the V4 are two heads of each two cylinders, but the single head of the inline four is one combined head for 4 cilinders... In other words: in both cases you have 4 "1 cylinder" heads for 4 cylinders, the amount of material in both setups should be roughly the same... On the crackshaft however the amount of material really is less in the V4.
@@rientsdijkstra4266 read again my original post and when you're done read it again from the start. Then we can conclude that you never built an engine.
@@anggaros1 Bro I dont't take orders from you. You mistakenly forgot that cylinderheads are determined by the cylinder and that for four cylinders you will always four cylinder-heads, no matter if these are spread over one "cast" or over two "casts". "Heaving built an engine" is completely irrelevant. You where wrong. Period.
@@rientsdijkstra4266ain't your bro. Learn English before engineering then come back. Maybe people will read yours by then.
Im not convinced that the V4 is the ultimate motor...example A Honda
Real GP racing is "sights and sounds" so different configurations are encouraged...you dont want inline 4s going away or yourvgoing away from what GP is all about.
2 little complements:
The reason for the 90° degree crank is that it creates a irregular firing order, which gives a bigger recovery window to the rear tire (the tire has more time to care about cornering when it is not „stressed“ by the ignition strokes), which improves traction during corner exit.
In a race bike, the center of gravity should not be as low as possible. A high center of gravity gives advantages in cornering. With the same leaning angle, you can compensate more centrifugal force when the center of gravity is higher.
A higher center of gravity is bad for acceleration, because the tendency of doing a wheelie is higher, but this is compensated by the different lowering devices.
The front end lowering devices are banned now in MotoGP.. since end of 22, I believe.... are you talking about some other loophole devices?
@@paulhope3401rear ride height devices are still allowed.
@@marquisbrown5060 I see, thanks.
Good feedback and points. I forgot to include the recovery window in the video candidly. I did also do a review on the holeshot and ride height devices as well :)
I thought the closer the fring pattern meant a smoother impulses to the rear tire? Better for traction.
I have an R1, I can say that my engine is the same volume and configuration as GP bike 😊
I would love an R1 soooo badly!
So ???
Great content mate - thank you. Maybe invest in a mic to avoid the "echo" effect in your audio track. Just a minor thing. Keep doing what you're doing and this channel will grow.
Thanks Joseph, I appreciate the feedback. Ironically I have a mic already believe it or not I just don't have anything in the room to absorb the noise :D - I will be investing in some better production items soon :)
I had 1985 Honda VF500F Interceptor with gear driven cam it was a jewel of a motor.
Great vid and analysis! An excellent point on how all this racing is just a marketing exercise. Suzuki left MotoGP cause it wasnt profitable, they make more in ATV and Boat engine sales than they do on motorcycles (at least in North America). Yamaha is just holding on, there isnt really a reason for them to spend all that addition mkney on developing a new engine when they probably outsell Ducati and KTM with their piano sales ahah. Subbed
Thanks mate! Glad you like the video and thanks for the feedback. I always want to make sure i keep getting better, the video wasn't perfect but they are getting better each time i post. Is there anything you'd like to see in the future?
Everything will change again in 2027 when they go back to 800cc.
This is a quality video. Here's to your growth
Thanks Ravager! I appreciate it. Anything you'd like to see in a video?
Alex Rins says aerodynamics makes more difference on a MotoGP bike than engine configuration does, lets see how he goes on the Yamaha! 🤞
Interesting to hear. Let's see what happens in 2024
and stoner proved it wrong
The moment of inertia argument doesn't wash. The v4s typically have an external flywheel which allows them to tweak engine inertia for each track, so it would be easy for them to increase it and match the inline 4s. All motogp bikes also run their engines backwards to cancel out the wheel inertia, Ie to reduce overall inertia.
Fair point. This part of the video came from the research I had done but it might not have been fully accurate with modern tech now. I'll do some more research on it :)
Also, don't Yamaha counter-rotate their crank for better overall moment of inertia?
Good video, but strongly dispute the notion that a V4 will always have lower weight. There are reasons it should actually be heavier.
Note: KTM officially states that its motoGP V engine is almost 90° without saying the exact angle.
The search for maximum compactness is probable without losing the advantages of this configuration.
In my opinion, the motogp's decision to standardise the ecu in 2016 helped ducati immensely. On the other hand, it hurt Honda the most and then Yamaha.
Please add more info how it affected Honda and Yamaha😊
Yes. The electronics magneti marelli were familiar with ducati for a long time and most of their engineers are in ducati and helped manage the electronics, where as japs could not get such expertise and lost way. Ducati was no where near the japs without the magneti marelli.
@@radhamanohar2307 Honda had a torque sensor that allowed their own R&D ECU electronics to control more and support a more sophisticated physics model. The standard ECU doesn't do that so puts everyone on the same lower level IMHO..
Not aware of the Yamaha GP situation, though their production ECU/IMU/TC is so good that tyres that wouldn't pass a road MOT test can still go quite fast on circuit, i.e. the IMU/TC is able to overcome the limitations to a considerable degree. That suggests a serious capability on the electronics, above the standard ECU used now.
OH ..!!!! Another Japanese bike supporter ........crying their little hearts out !!!...Get a life ...!!!!!,,,There is many more Ducati victories coming ...!!!
@@kingalfred3902 not so much. Wait and see. The Japanese will come back. The issue is with fossil fuel ban and waste of money on further development.
From my understanding, the crossplane inline 4 in the Yamaha has worst primary and secondary balance and less power than a flatplane inline 4. The advantage of the crossplane inline 4 are the interrupted power pulses that are presented to the rear tire. The interrupted power pulses allow the tire to rest more in between power pulses vs a flatplane inline 4's even power pulses which don't allow the tire to rest. A 90 degree V4's firing order doesn't have even power pulses and the interrupted power pulses are one of the advantages of a 90 degree V4.
Also, an inline 4 has a weight distribution advantage because a lot of the weight is over the front wheels which helps with front end traction where a V4 is compromised because only half of it's weight is over the front wheels which compromises front end traction. Honda is using a V4 in their MotoGP bike but as you can see, they're not doing that well. Ducati's advantage is the aero work, which keeps the front end planted under acceleration, they've been working on for the past decade that has finally paid off.
Good points Petrol, you're right. I'm making some adjustments in the description to clear some points I missed :)
Secondary balances are worse on flatplane
I have never read a peer reviewed ASME Engineering paper that proves a V4 can be more powerful than an inline-4.
Or the other myth, that the V4 has better torque, and a better power band.
Arguably the V4 can have more optimal flywheel affect - but again, an inline- 4 crankshaft can be designed with the same flywheel inertia.
As for the size of the respective lumps - both architectures have problems squeezing into a motorcycle frame.
The width of the inline-4 is not a deal killer. The M1 and GSX-RR are only a few mm wider. It's the rider drag that is more important.
Why are the V4's proving the better answer at the moment ~ because that's where the big $$$ are being spent by better Engineers and their computers.
I've always favored the I3 - mostly because the sound is amazing.
I miss the 20v of the older Yamaha R1. They just seemed to react better to throttle inputs.
Can we expect v5s becoming common in the future. I think this is possible.
🤔
You never know. a V5 may come back into the spotlight!
Lmao No
The rules state the biked must have 4 cylinders. So unless ducati develops a v5, it probably won't happen.
@@r6guy That's so true!
That cross plane Yamaha R1 is the sweetest bike around
How does the inline crank flex more if it sits on bearings in the middle? It's not like there's only two bearings at the ends and that's the endofit... This doesnt make any sense...
Even with the any additional bearings to my knowledge it'll still be more flexible. That's from what I've read and researched.
Nice video but you forgot to mention the 2nd harmonic of the inline 4
and the fact that the Yamaha R1 uses a counterbalance shaft to stop that problem.
That increases the overall crankshaft mass & friction, robbing power.
Now I understand why Marc Marquez said he has to change his riding style after switching to Gresini Ducati.
Honda is V4 same as Ducati and he is still flipping bike like a coin nearly every race weekend, so no much change here 🤭
The reason V4s are successful right now, is because they are in the bikes with the best aero and electronic packages
It's nothing to do with the engine config, as the huge number of Inline 4 race wins and WC's over the last 20 years prove.
i always thought honda has an Inline 4 in their gp bike... can you explain why they then have these power struggles compared to rest of the v4's? Is it just missing in experience in R&D?
Honda are the market leader and can lead in R&D too. It's not the peak power that determines the outcome rather how the power is made across the rev range. It's complex physics with the bike leant over and getting on the power out of the corner. So suspension and tyre grip limit what the engine can achieve...
please do more videos about bike's engines and for smaller cc's engines too like 150cc. im saving money to open bike repair shop and still learning about their engines from small to big cc
Nice video, but there is nothing inherently different in the ability to create power in a V vs Inline engine.
In fact, if you consider the potential cooling disadvantage of the rear two cylinders it actually has a slight hill to climb
One of the most informational and interesting videos I have ever seen. Great work Dan, keep it up!
Thanks Skywalker (love the name) - Glad you like it! Is there anything you would like to see for a video?
@@absolutedan9173 thanks Dan! I would love to see a video explaining how supercharged motorcycles work
Wow, what an awesome vid! There's so much absolute junk out there on the internet and what an excellent explanation especially for the Motogp newb. I instantly subscribed! Best of luck on your channel, you're a great presenter.
Glad to have found a young channel with lot of potential! I always enjoy seeing the evolution of interesting channels! And to add to the topic, I. A Yamaha fan and no matter if they win or loose I always gonna love that inline4 crossplane engine!
“The design of a V4 allows it to be supplied in an overall better package wich is lighter and also able to produce a lot more of power than an inline 4 cylinder.. “ is this a technical explanation? I think you should try harder as this IMHO is not much of an argument. For example, please explain how a more complex engine (V4) with more parts (two cylinder heads, two distributions and so on) is supposed to be lighter.
Good stuff Dan ! Keep at it and channel growth will be inevitable!
Thanks Cyrus! Let's hope so ;)
I think the V4 has an unexpected bonus as it is balanced front and rear and acts like a stabilizer - gyroscope
4 cylinders in a bank with crank rotation, can't match that effect
Because the riders are pushing everything to a radical extreme, that effect, becomes very substantial
What engine do you prefer? A V4 or an Inline 4? Let me know in the comments below👇
V4 for the track and Inline4 for the street
Yet Yamaha has won waaaaay more races and championships than Ducati and only Marc was able to do anything with the Honda since Dani left the series. People act like it’s been a decade since Yamaha was winning. They literally have 1 bad season and everyone acts like they are some background team with completely obsolete equipment. It’s bizarre since Ducati went soooo much longer with a riders championship
3:14 This is not necessarily true. Crossplane I4 has worse primary balance than a flatplane. The only benefit to a crossplane is the power gaps which allow the rear tyre "recovery intervals".
Something not mentioned is the crossplane R1 production engine requires a balance shaft, inevitably this is a drag on power and of course adds weight and heat load. Not sure anyone outside of Yamaha knows if the M1 has a balance shaft but I suspect it must for the same reasons as the R1. OTOH if it turned in the opposite direction to the crank it might mitigate the inertia of the longer I4 crank somewhat.
Where the crossplane excels is in the transfer of kinetic energy from one cylinder to its neighboring cylinder (as one reaches TDC or BDC the next one is at maximum piston speed). But the V4 has a similar trait, compared to a standard 180 degree V4.
Thanks for the feedback. I'll make sure i do more research for these types of videos in the future!
I thought the crossplane was to smoothen out torque distribution
@@carlosandleon exactly the opposite. If you map out the power pulses over 720 degrees of the crank, and compare to a normal 180 degree crank you will see the difference.
@@sburns2421 Well yes but Yamaha specifically states that they did this to smoothen out the inertial torque of the crankshaft.
@@sburns2421 ruclips.net/video/oEXUrO5wYcE/видео.htmlsi=CZCm15-yjeW4wpnJ
Man! I love your channel on super bike 🏍️ keep up the good work champ 🫶🏾👍
thanks mate
An interesting view, and goes partway to explaining the fundamental differences between the V4 MotoGP bikes, and the in-line fours. But you don't tell the whole story, and I feel these other aspects are worth mentioning. Firstly, whereas the in-line four has a longer crankshaft, and more main bearings (as you say) it also requires a balance shaft (or two) when fired like a 90 degree V engine (as mentiond by Vasilis below). (This is because the cross-plane in-line four may well FIRE like a V-twin, but its forces aren't in the different directions of the 'real' V4). This is where the extra rotational weight comes in for the 'crossplane' four, and often one balance shaft (of two) is required to rotate at greater than engine speed, bringing in other inertial and physical limitations.
The second point is that, although the Yamaha engine is "larger" in terms of width, it is also shorter/smaller front-to-rear, allowing for a longer swing arm, and attendant suspension and power-delivery advantages. It also has its mass 'centralised' more than the V4, when viewed from side on, making it easier to position the COM closer to ideally, in terms of height, and front/rear. The third aspect you didn't include is the 70 degree(?) offset between the two side-by-side 'V2s' of the V4 Ducati configuration, introduced about seven years ago, and shared with Aprilia in recent years, and no doubt associated with Aprilia's improved performance in the last two years. The Ducati road V4s share this design, with its claimed benefits in tyre 'loading', heat and wear. But of course this design does not share crankpins between the two paired cylinders, as they are slightly offset. A dynamic cutaway diagram of the Ducati engine in your video briefly shows this characteristic.
So there is 'far more to this than meets the eye', and a second video covering these subtler aspects may be worth attempting. But thanks for this video - it has helped people understand this perplexing topic, and warrants a follow-up to 'flesh out the detail'. This initial video could serve as an introduction to a subject more complex than first described. As to the R1 road model - apparently this model is being dropped by Yamaha next year, so the race bike's connecton to their road model may be changing, and rumour has it that Yamaha DO have a V4 engine for their GP campaign.
Johnny Rea's not enjoying the crossplane Yamaha superbike as much as his (conventional in-line four) Kawasaki at this point, and poor old Quartararo has risked his neck for many years trying to win on it in MotoGP. Honda followed Ducati from a 75 degree 'V' to a similar 90 degree years ago, but without (as far as we know...) the 70 degree offset between the two 'sides'. That may be next year's Honda, if they want Marc back! Hang onto your patents, Ducati...
In a 90 degree V engine the primary forces produced by the pistons moving back and forth act as a pure rotating mas, therefore it is easy to balance this force with an excentric mass in the crankshaft.
I’m surprised you didn’t discuss how Ducati ‘s v4 is different from the others and how Ducati lobbied motogp for a rules change to give them a power advantage. This Ducati’s dominance
In all honesty I didn't know
The rules make this engine better suited, other then that I disagree with many of your comments.
the thing is, most of the v4 now, with the help of aero devices have similar racing line to inline 4, with the more power, it will launch itself faster than inline 4. electronic have major part in it too. I dont think inline 4 will have any chance rn, unless the motogp really goes back to 800cc ish that have been rumour
Could very well be. If they do drop the cc again it would be really interesting to see what Yamaha decides to do. I wonder as well will they even stay in MotoGP?
800cc was a disaster and cost of an entirely new bike is absurd .HONda will want 800cc to pressout small euro manufacturers ... honda= worst engineers in motogp so have dorna hinder penalize better manufacturers
I like using telemetry to advance my performance and you said it right,if they switch,then they would have to start with a blank file of telemetry for engine parameters. No previous data to load,overlap,analyze and go from. Yes,i'm really interested what will they do. Anyway,good video,nicely explained,recommendable.
Cheers!
I think you mean Data Logging, i.e. recording data on many sensors as the bike travels, for subsequent analysis. Telemetry means sending data from a vehicle, potentially making adjustments to some parameters and that's not legal in bike racing.
Formula One does that but the capability is regulated and probably the reason why the driver has so many controls on the steering wheel.
On bikes the buttons are likely to support control of traction control, e.g. Aprilia RSV-4, or alternate ignition maps/modes, e.g. Rain or Dry, where the rider can choose as they ride. Having spare attention for much more than that is hard at racing speeds and has the potential for disaster beyond a missed gear shift.
I think you missed a key advantage of the V4 (unless I missed you say it). You mentioned it is smaller and allows it to be moved to the right location for vehicle dynamics but the key advantage is that it's significantly narrower, which has a huge advantage on the bike's aerodynamic drag force and also allows the fairings to be made in different shapes for aero efficiency and potentially downforce.
@4:21 ''A V4 engine also creates less friction because it only operates on 3 main bearings instead of the minimum of 5 that are required by an inline four''.
Which means a V4 has 6 main bearings, 3 for each crank. ...Would you mind rephrasing that?
Once i read an article saying that right now a 3 cylinder may be even better. What do you think?
a 3 cylinder has it's place. If they change the regs in 2027 we might see somethign like this! Would be pretty interesting and being able to have the best of both worlds
(Perhaps) less crank bearings in a V4, but more cam bearings, along with more potential weight from the two extra cams and one extra cylinder head. I also can’t see why a V4 would produce more power than an inline four or flat four. V4s main benefit is that it’s narrower.
Very well explained mate!
Thanks Gonzo! I missed out a few key points which I need to update in the video description. I'll make sure I get better at these as we go
I don't care much about Moto GP....I chose a big 1200 V4 in my bike when the "Moto GP" was still racing 500cc 2-strokers.
Now, nearly 40 years later that Yamaha VMax enginewise is still a piece of art, even though I bought the 1700cc V4 VMax aside of it.
V4 in bikes is like a V8 in cars. Emotionalwise.
You should probably make a link to the Honda five cylinder V5 video you made in the description. I was all set to suggest you make that video and then you already did.
Great analysis. Makes me miss the era of the 500 c.c. two stroke v4's even more.😢
Yes, ur right bro, it's been a long time that yamaha that shines their cross plane technology, and it is very hard to jump up in v4 and waste money for nothing like a scrap, the better way for Yamaha is to maintain and improve their gp bike for future racing and it can sold affordable
Hopefully they'll be able to perform better next year!
I love this one all physics and theoretical advantage. The real world is the crazy bastard with unbelievable skills that rides it
I mean, you're not wrong hah
Its probably been pointed out but Honda's motoGP has a V4 but their road bikes have inline 4's Yamaha can go to a V4 in motogp as well, but its more likely that they wont because of the other reasons listed rather then marketing
This is also a fair point. They could very well do with not much affecting with marketing
Great point. But I'm sure the majority of Honda fans would love to see a V4 version of the CBR or a sportier VFR. I've got a 94 VFR.
@@kanebaker4294 A VFR in a sportier frame or even naked bike would be MONEY i would sell my soul for one of those!! trying to find a VFR/intercepter is such a pain they are super rare around my area gotta go to like cali or something but now that i looked not that much money for one but 3500 for a bike with 75,000 miles...like yeah its a honda but...oooof that would be pushing it for me...though its an 02' so still gear driven cams i think so that'd be money as well...great now i need one hahaha
i believe yamaha is developing a V4 engine right now its clear that the way forward for 2 wheel road racing in the 1000cc class is the v4 platform
hold up, hold up.
are you telling me a I4 Crossplane vibrates less than a I4 Flatplane?
Isn't the flat plane perfectly primarily balanced, unlike the cross plane that has neither perfect primary nor secondary balance, but is better at handling for the larger recovery gaps between engine pulses transfered to the tyre?
You are right. A fair few people mentioned this to me and It's something I'm going to make a couple of notes on in the video description. It's all good feedback
@@absolutedan9173 I appreciate it, man. the video was entertaining, I liked it. keep it up!
Excellent overview. Personally I prefer the IL4, the sound of Yamaha's cross-plane crank engine is fabulous.
Thanks DM! Glad you liked it. Anything you'd like to see in a future video?
@@absolutedan9173 ...just looking at some of your other content. Love the LMH v LMDh overview, and the Baggers vlog is excellent 👌 ...something around the different Rally classes could be interesting. ...R1 v R2, R3 v R4 etc
i think the ducati v4 engine also uses reverse rotating engine compared to conventionally used, so when you open fully the trottle then it help ceeping the front wheel down,, and this allow giving more trottle before wheeleing. aka lift of of frontwheel. You notis this sitting on a bmw boxer engine opening the trottle, then the mass of the crank pull the bike to the left. by accellerating mass from the crank.
All GP bikes have counter-rotating Crankshafts
You could do with more soft furnishings in that room to deaden the echo!
Working on it hopefully soon :D
Correct me if I'm wrong, but crossplanes need a counterbalancing shaft. Adding weight and complexity.
I think the point is not only winning the race, they need to win the market as well.
IMO on top of the reasons given in this video, a bike with i4 engine has certain 'bigger/wider' looks to it compared to slim bike with V2/V4 which some people said it looks very menacing and they like it. For me personally it's about the heat management as my country can be very hot some time and having a furious engine right below my seat would make for very unpleasant ride.
So yeah, despite V4 dominating the race, I'm glad that Yamaha sticking to their i4.
Yeah here in Australia the v4 Ducati run very very hot in our summer time
Does Yamaha have a V-4 production model? Could they develop a V-4 in another series?
Not 100% in all honesty. I didn't think there were but I could be wrong
they should give a weight brake to yamaha to run the inline 4 or some other concession....keep GP sights and sounds
I own a 99 blade and a 2001 vfr800fi , obviously early days of v4 and 100cc less ,inline four blade lighter as well so counter to current v4 dominance.Had a 2000 Vtr1000f as well until last year just to compare all three(very torquey)
I'm not sure that v4 are lighter than 4 in line. On the contrary, v4 have 2 blocks of cylinder head instead of 1. That's a lot heavier (with also 2 cam drive devices).
Never heard anyone suggest that a V4 has perfect primary balance. Famously they don't, they almost always have balance shafts because of that.
I'm sure Yamaha is developing an 850cc V4 right now for the 2027 regulations.
I'd love if yamaha brought out a V4 sportbike. You know they would kill it. They can keep the R1 but give us a RV4
the weight advantage is small and kinda irrelevant cause as you know the rules have a min weight. also a main plus for v4s is that because they have less width engineers often install exterior adjustable engine parts that can change from race to race according to track needs. its a lets say window to the rules. but above all as we saw inline 4 can be competitve but that idiotic rule with standard ecus that are made from an Italian company suited for v4s its totally anti racing...
I don't believe that a V4 allows an engine to be lighter given that they have 2 cylinder heads
each with a total of more cam bearings and 4 sides instead of two . Also the inline crank
makes it easier to "turn in" with the revolving weights end t
please ignore I was deleting and hit "post" instead
Because development from 6-8 work’s Ducati’s gives unlimited feedback.
1:14 When you flip the car in GTA.
Fascinating stuff, thank you.
Thanks Glyn, glad you enjoyed it
I think in road legal bikes also Suzuki in line engines are considered to be one of the fastest,
Imagine if Suzuki still in there? Suzuki was the perfect race bike which can itself preserve tyres... That last corner move by Rins on Suzuki at 2019 BritishGP can't be done by a bike rather than Suzuki...
I'm sure that if DORNA wasn't the clown show that it is, Suzuki would still be there.
Well articulated. Thank you.
At this point that Yamaha is discontinuing the R1 in the euro market do you have a different opinion now ?
Still love inline 4, because of the sound
Yamaha is probably betting everything on the 2027 rule changes. They're most likely hoping for aero restrictions that will place the i4's better turning ability back at the front.
not to mentions that the r1 shreds in wsbk
What a clear concise well spoken topic. You are a credit to the English language. I cant abide these sites with some robotic babble.
Excellent analysis
Thanks Alistair
thanx for the great dissection
This is now old news considering Yamahas announced their developing a V4
I’d prefer the Honda’s V5 engine. One of a kind and dominating engine.
I'd love to do a video on this soon! Such a cool engine
Given the two different riding styles need for the two engines, it would seem like another big factor would be tires and the maximum grip level the tire can provide under any given conditions. With the inline four utilizing higher cornering speeds it would seem to be at a disadvantage with tires that provide less gripe overall, whereas the V4 is get in fast get out fast where the bike is more upright when on the brakes/throttle and slower when leaned over, which would appear to be better given the same low grip tires. Hearing tons of complaints from the Japanese riders about lack of grip. So is the V4 and the associated riding style just able to utilize the Michelin tires better?
Could very well be. Tyres do make a huge difference!
Forgot to mention the rotation of the v4 engine oposite to the rear wheel to cancel centrifugal forces to help with handling
I don't think you know as much as you think you do!
V4's are not "smaller" than I4's, they are just narrower, allowing the bike to be narrower and giving better packaging options. The engines occupy the same volume in space (in fact, the V4 will occupy MORE space because it has two valve trains, double the cam chains etc). It's just the space it occupies is in a better place.
I also think it's very arguable that V4's produce more power! Not necessarily, this is not an intrinsic attribute of a V4 design! I4's dominate the horsepower battle in cars, what hot hatch did you ever hear of that had a V4?
There is no reason that with enough money and R&D an i4 bike could not dominate Motogp again, and/or produce the most hp.
Yamaha have announced the R1 is being discontinued and they will probably withdraw from MotoGP also. So that's another reason they won't spend the money to go V4.
I never claimed to know anything or be an expert. I've just done research from multiple sources. I'm getting better at the research I'm doing :)
@tosgem I'm always careful about the myth.... "an inline-4 crank is too long /heavy for the horsepower = too much flex/ vibration"
The most powerful engine ever in F1 was the 1983 BMW 1,499cc M12/13 turbocharged inline-4.
Unlimited boost! 1,400bhp. 933bhp/liter (!)
Way more overstressed than the MotoGP Yamaha normally aspirated 1,000cc inline-4 @ only 300bhp/liter.
And the BMW's crank was not a problem.
As a licensed Mechanical Engineer, I know that an inline-4 can be designed to be just as powerful as a V4.
It's just a matter of crank and block bearing design. The spacing of the main bearing journals being the most important.
I cannot remember the M1 being a hand grenade - only that smokey Rossi blow up at Mugello.
So, it's not a crank problem, eh?
What I think it is ~ that Yamaha have not spent the $$ on research to develop the I4 engine.
Combustion chamber, Pistons, Cam, Valves, Ignition etc.
Or, they just do not have the brilliant engine technology that the Italians have at the moment.
I betcha Gigi and crew, KTM and Aprilia could build a powerful inline-4.
But that's not what they sell. After all, MOTOGP is all about advertising what you sell.
Why Yamaha will never build a V4. They don't have a V4 crotch rocket in the showroom to sell. They are pushing their weird crankshaft!
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wpbest comment on the whole thread 👏🏾
Power = torque X RPM. Torque is a function of how efficiently the cylinder is filled with air, and how efficiently the fuel-air mixture is burned. Cylinder arrangement has absolutely nothing to do with power... (therefore the statement @ 0:39 in this video is completely false)...
I'm wondering where the author of this video got his mechanical engineering degree???
✅
MotoGP is lagging behind in technology. At this point we should be exploring forced induction engines. You can buy economy cars with turbos! There is no reason why we can’t have tiny small-displacement engines that produce the same kind of performance numbers. Imagine a tiny 500 cc 3 cylinder engine making 300 + bhp. It CAN be done. I e mentioned this many times, and have always been criticized. “We already tried turbo’s,” they exclaim. Yes- but that was also the analog era. With modern computing tech, we can sort all of that out. MotoGP should be more like the OLD F1. Imagination and creative engineering should be at the forefront. Two-strokes can burn cleaner than four-strokes today! Allow it! Let the genius’s run wild, man!
Turbo MotoGP Bikes would be mad and I'm all here for it hah!
Sounds pretty legit but why are then consumer cars dominated by 4-in-line engines?
Good question. I would assume the engine production itself is a lot cheaper. That would be one of the main factors surely.