Re: GP silly season

In article <wkMVNTjOKUKDFAS9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Julian Bond <julian_bond@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Howard Kveck <YOURhoward@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Thu, 15 Sep 2005 00:56:54
> > I don't know how significantly Yamaha tweaked the bike over the
> >winter, so I
> >can't really venture a guess about who played what role in getting it
> >straightened out, how bad it actually was, or who's fault it was in the first
> >place.
>
> It was virtually a new bike. Completely new frame/swingarm, heavily
> modified engine. The same sort of level of change as Honda's replacement
> RCV for next year that was wheeled out 10 days ago.

OK, thanks. I couldn't remember and hadn't had a chance to go back and look
into it yet.

>
> >I wouldn't say it's even close to giving Rossi credit as "chief
> >design engineer"
>
> Has anyone ever claimed that? Or is that what you've read into other
> people's posts. Because if it is, you're wrong.

Hmm, maybe I wasn't as clear on that as I could have been. Here's Mark's
comments to which that was part of my reply:

-----------------
> What you say here I would mostly agree with, and I don't have a huge difference
> in opinion with Julian either, but it's things like his "it's pretty hard to
> separate what is 'real design and engineering' and what is track based R&D"
> comment, which is sliding at least a toe into the "Rossi as chief design
> engineer" position,
-----------------

What I was saying was that I don't agree with that assessment (the "sliding a
toe into..." part). And I've been saying that I didn't see anyone implying that
he was the main source of design change/engineering. Am I making sense now?

--
tanx,
Howard

Butter is love.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
.

Loading