Burgess on the "Sizz" - (MotoCzysz C1)

Baketech · 02-03-2005, 7:40 AM

Quote:

The Doctor’s Head Nurse Speaks Out About the C1
1/13/05
In an interview with MCN last week, Valentino Rossi’s crew chief at Gauloises Yamaha, Jeremy Burgess, talked about the MotoCzysz American MotoGP project.

Burgess said, “Anybody can build a race bike. There is no real cost in building it – it’s when you put it out to test that you really find if it works or not. These days you cannot be radical with design concepts. You have to go by tried and tested product. The bike is easy, but it’s not as important as development.”

The man behind Valentino “The Doctor” Rossi’s charge to the 2004 MotoGP title believes the latest American challenge will find it difficult to contend with the giants of the Japanese motorcycle industry.

In 2003, Rossi and Burgess campaigned the mighty Honda RC211V to another MotoGP Championship. However, before the motorcycle was given to them to race, the new 5 cylinder machine had to be designed, engineered, and built. “I am not sure that Honda would agree with Mr. Burgess’ comment that ‘the bike is easy’,” said Czysz after reading the MCN article. Honda R&D motorcycle division has a staff of over 2,000 and HRC has an additional 200 engineers and personnel. A lot of time and money is spent on “the easy” part, long before Mr. Burgess gets to even hear about the machine.

Czysz almost agreed with Burgess’ statement that “the bike is only a tool at the end of the day and half the time it is the rider who is the one to determine how well it performs.” Czysz thinks that “all the time, it is the rider who determines how well it performs. That is exactly why we are proceeding in the direction we are. In my eyes, we are not trying radical design concepts – we are looking for more creative solutions to the same design concepts or problems that Honda is.”

As for MNC reporting that it is Czysz’s strategy to take the machine from drawing board to the race track, Czysz responds, “Absolutely! But in due time. It took Honda 50 years to build the RC211V. And our R&D department, well, let’s just say it is a little smaller than Honda’s. All indications are that we have unveiled some very creative solutions to problems that I feel have been band aided by very skillful development. I expect our machine to be very competitive in a period much shorter than 50 years,” said Czysz. “This is a process. You must take steps. We have taken some very significant steps, but we still have hundreds more to go.”

“I guess one of the steps before arriving is being noticed. I am thrilled that Mr. Burgess has noticed us. So I guess we are one step closer.”

From http://www.motoczysz.com
(I hate Flash sites, but there is good info here....)

Baketech · 02-03-2005, 7:41 AM

Some thoughts from Ienatsch as well....

Quote:

MotoCzysz C1 First Ride
by Nick Ienatsch
12/15/04
I flew to Portland 18 months ago to meet Michael Czysz and yesterday I had the chance to sample the motorcycle Czysz showed me on paper. Our first meeting convinced me that this guy was far more than hype and promise, and my first laps aboard his bike were exceptionally good.

What should you realistically expect from a group building its first bike? Maybe the bike starting and negotiating the pit lane should be a cause for major celebration, especially when the bike in question carries more than a few unique and patented solutions to motorcycle performance. But Czysz’s C1 is quite a bit beyond those fledgling first steps and I went into my lapping session knowing the bike was freshly assembled, but also knowing that the earliest testing had gone quite well.

Czysz, a very good rider in his own right, had spent time on the bike in Portland and in Las Vegas, finally deeming the performance safe enough to share with me and a few other interested persons who will remain nameless but have GP world or AMA national championships attached to their names. My plan was to run three shake-down laps, pit for a check, then run five more. Unfortunately the lining came off the slipper clutch and the bike wouldn’t refire after my initial three laps.

I knew that the first three laps would be a slow assessment, but I went quicker than I expected to, and quicker than Czysz and his group expected. That’s a good sign, a sign of rideability and of comfort, showing that the assembly of these pieces has produced a bike that at least feels natural on a racetrack. I didn’t rev it hard and I didn’t get crazy at corner entrances, but by the third lap I was carrying decent cornering speed, using the brakes and throttle relatively aggressively. A few things really stand out.

Primarily, none of the trick parts (front end, engine configuration, twin clutches, rear swingarm and suspension) made me adapt to them. That was a primary topic of discussion between Czysz and myself over the last 18 months because we both race 250 GP bikes and feel that ergonomics, traction information, weight transfer, initial throttle and brake feel…were vital aspects of going quick no matter what the bike. New technology must highlight these aspects, not mask or change them and my first three laps were extremely encouraging.

I loved how the bike came on throttle and the smoothness of the engine seemed to allow me to feel initial throttle better than on the in-line fours I usually ride. On the other side of the straight, the front brakes provided terrific feel and I started running them way into the corner, even by the end of the first lap. It just felt right, and I could sneak off the brakes and sneak on the throttle with wonderful smoothness. The C1 steered really well, no surprises despite the suspension being on the soft, comfortable side of track settings. I should also mention that the bike started, idled and ran without a glitch, though I never exceeded 8500 rpm during my three laps.

I can’t assess much more without being full of BS because I simply didn’t have a chance to let things stretch out before the lining came off the slipper clutch. A few things bothered me. I thought the back of the seat was slightly too wide or perhaps simply too square and should more closely resemble a TZ250 profile so the rider can more side to side more easily. The initial half inch of shock movement was under damped, a problem Czysz and Ohlins were working on during the day I lapped. The bike’s current setup leaves it quite tall and Ohlins and Czysz have already mapped out the parts to bring the bike down over an inch. The Britten was tall and that was always a challenge for my 5’8” simply because it takes quite a bit of lean angle to get my knee on the ground, an important technique for serious corner entrances.

Frankly, I’m blown away that this bike even exists. That it works so well at this early stage validates Czysz’s designs. As the C1 rolled to a stop after the third lap, I flipped up my faceshield, grabbed Czysz’s shoulder: “Damn, you’ve really got something.”

Nick Ienatsch has worked as a motojournalist since 1984. In those 20 years he has ridden and raced a wide variety of production and one-off machines. He rode the first Buell, the prototype Bimota V-due, raced the Britten, the Tularis and a Bimota Tesi. He will continue to be one of the riders to develop the C1.

Pete · 02-03-2005, 8:55 AM

Just lost a lot of respect for Burgess.

ND4SPD · 02-03-2005, 8:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete

Just lost a lot of respect for Burgess.

I'm sure he's crushed.

Baketech · 02-03-2005, 9:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete

Just lost a lot of respect for Burgess.

I'm trying to understand if what he said was maybe taken out of context....

Pete · 02-03-2005, 9:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baketech

I'm trying to understand if what he said was maybe taken out of context....

That thought did cross my mind.

Pete · 02-03-2005, 9:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ND4SPD

I'm sure he's crushed.

You obviously have me confused with someone who thinks that my opinion is worth something.

ccwilli3 · 02-03-2005, 9:17 AM

I bet it was out of context but I gotta believe that burgess knows quite a bit more than Czysz gives him credit for, despite Czysz thinking that bikes are just "handed" to him to race. Not so, not at all.

I do think the Czysz guy is a little full of himself.

Pete · 02-03-2005, 9:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccwilli3

I do think the Czysz guy is a little full of himself.

You're one to talk, "Mr. I Have Hundreds of Chicks Begging Me to Bang Them 24/7."

Baketech · 02-03-2005, 9:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccwilli3

I bet it was out of context but I gotta believe that burgess knows quite a bit more than Czysz gives him credit for, despite Czysz thinking that bikes are just "handed" to him to race. Not so, not at all.

I do think the Czysz guy is a little full of himself.

I don't think Czysz was saying that...he was just making a comparison. The guy is a good designer, so he understands the collaborative process better than most...

As far as being full of himself....he's an archi, so it goes with the territory...

luvtolean · 02-03-2005, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete

Just lost a lot of respect for Burgess.

You and me both. That sounds like a corporate Japanese attitude to a "T". VERY disappointing to me as an engineer. New designs are all about risk...

Sizz does seem to be an arrogant prick, nice ideas though.

QuikMike · 02-03-2005, 11:00 AM

me three....I hate to see some sh*t on a up and comers idea...sounds a bit like Japanese corporate speak to me as well...Maybe Burgess' comments were taken out of text, but, to me, either way, they seem a bit misguided....Personally, I'd like to see this Sizz guy make a little headway into a world or national series just to shake things up a little bit....seems to be on the right track to do so...

ccwilli3 · 02-03-2005, 11:44 AM

unless rossi rides his bike, it'll be behind the KTM powered roberts' bike. PERIOD

ccwilli3 · 02-03-2005, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete

You're one to talk, "Mr. I Have Hundreds of Chicks Begging Me to Bang Them 24/7."

hater.

luvtolean · 02-03-2005, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccwilli3

unless rossi rides his bike, it'll be behind the KTM powered roberts' bike. PERIOD

Yep. But that doesn't mean it's not a good bike. It's too bad the AMA turned Formula Extreme into a spec class. This bike is a much better fit there than in MotoGP.

QuikMike · 02-03-2005, 3:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccwilli3

unless rossi rides his bike, it'll be behind the KTM powered roberts' bike. PERIOD

I'll buy that....I'll have to agree with LTL here that it would be cool to see the C1 in the FX class as opposed to the GP series....hey, the guy has come farther with the bike than a lot of folks thought he would...it's a testament to him and his crew behind him....I'd like to see him suceed....

tbeemer · 02-04-2005, 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccwilli3

unless rossi rides his bike, it'll be behind the KTM powered roberts' bike. PERIOD

Well, at least he'd still be in front of the Kawasaki's...

Tom

Scout · 02-04-2005, 6:11 AM

It was in a time I was concerned with other things (I know, blasphemy), but I wonder what people thought about Britten and his V-1000 motorcycle before it started storming past the Factory bikes (in the series he ran it in)?

I just hope Sizz gets the funding and backing he needs. It never hurts to put something new in the mix. And he's not so far behind as you think - It's only been a couple years since GP went to four-strokes. It could be argued there is serious development still to be made from the factory's engine/ frame/ suspension configurations...

Scout · 02-04-2005, 6:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbeemer

Well, at least he'd still be in front of the Kawasaki's...

Tom

ouch

Sgtsride · 02-04-2005, 3:44 PM

Can some of our engineers or anyone else in the know, explain why the engine's two cranks counter-rotate? To me, it seems that a single north-south oriented crank would be an advantage since it would help keep the bike from wheelying and pitching forward under braking. I can only guess it's configuration is meant to eliminate a sideways rocking force when it's revved like you can see in automobiles when the hood is raised.

Baketech · 02-04-2005, 4:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sgtsride

Can some of our engineers or anyone else in the know, explain why the engine's two cranks counter-rotate? To me, it seems that a single north-south oriented crank would be an advantage since it would help keep the bike from wheelying and pitching forward under braking. I can only guess it's configuration is meant to eliminate a sideways rocking force when it's revved like you can see in automobiles when the hood is raised.

The configuration is intended to cancel out both torque gyroscopic forces created by the engine....

If you look closely, it's really two parallel twins stuck together to form a really shallow V4 (15 degrees)....

Interesting design, but I think the bevel gear setup that ties them together will prove to be a weak link in the system...

CBR929RE · 02-04-2005, 4:57 PM

not sure how many ccs it is but is it under 900 so it can comply with the new rules in a few years?

and with it being in FX doesn't it have to meet certain homologation rules first?