19 replies to this topic

[McLaren M20]

This weekend while testing at Barcelona the Ducati Moto GP Bike was timed at 215 MPH at the end of the Straight. Last year the Ferrari 2003GA was timed at just over 200 MPH. while it seems the Moto GP bikes are quicker in a straight line are they quicker in Acceleration and Braking as well ? I have read an F1 Car can Accelerate from 0 to 100 mph in 3 seconds, But I never seen any Acceleration or Braking numbers for a Moto GP.

[schuy]

Sorry, haven't got any MOTOGP figures.

I do know that a Kawasaki 12ZR(178hp) can do 0-60mph in 2.41 seconds.
MotoGPs these days have in excess of 200bhp, so...

[Viktor]

In acceleration I think thay can be even, even if the MotoGP bike is very slow off the line in race trim. In breaking the MotoGP bike is totaly crushed by a F1 car. The difference is huge! But the F1 car is helped by downforce, 4 wheels and all other things. A F1 car lap the same track 25-30 seconds faster then a MotoGP bike.

/Viktor

[Powersteer]

Think i saw or heard somewhere that the Moro GP Ducati is doing 245bhp. In F1 terms the Duke's V4 would make a 3 liter V12 engine producing 735 bhp.

[Tracy]

Outright power is not the key focus on a moto GP bike. They are very concenred with the shape of the powercureve and the ease in which a rider can 'get on the power' An engine with a very spikey power delivery - like the yamaha, is very dfficult to get out of corners because the spikes in the power cause weight transfer and the resulting wheelie makes it pretty tricky to steer! Bike like tghe honda are very drivable and easy to get out of the corners, hence the difference in race pace. Of course in the Hondas case it doesn't hrt that as well as being the engine with the best powercurve, it is also one of the most powerful! Whilst it would be possible to ring out much more power out of these engines, I think being able to control them would be an entirely diffenrt thing. Hence the lack of pneumatic valve trains, fly by wire, super high reves etc. You will of couse find these on the Aprillia, near the back of the grid. Its based on a cossie f1 motor.....

[richdubbya]

The greatest difference between them is the tire contact patch of the drive wheel(s), probably 20 times more on the f-1, and this relates to all the reasons stated above

[int2str]

MotoGP 2003 - Malaysian Grand Prix:
Fstest Lap, Valentino Rossi 2'02.480 ~ 163 Km/h

F1 2004 - Malaysian Grand Prix
Fastest Lap, J.P. Montoya 1'34.223 ~ 212 Km/h

[h4lf]

Originally posted by McLaren M20
This weekend while testing at Barcelona the Ducati Moto GP Bike was timed at 215 MPH at the end of the Straight. Last year the Ferrari 2003GA was timed at just over 200 MPH. while it seems the Moto GP bikes are quicker in a straight line are they quicker in Acceleration and Braking as well ? I have read an F1 Car can Accelerate from 0 to 100 mph in 3 seconds, But I never seen any Acceleration or Braking numbers for a Moto GP.

"Loris Capirossi went faster than any other rider in the history of the sport, making the most of a 40km/h tailwind to clock an astounding 347.4kmh/215.8mph on the Ducati Desmosedici GP4."
http://www.crash.net...cid=6&nid=88321

i think that explains part of the 215mph, but no matter what way you look at it that is pretty fast

[RedIsTheColour]

There are a few factors but the most important is fuel consumption. The F1 car can use as much per lap as strategy allows but MGP bikes have 24L for the whole race and no refuelling. Capirossi did that speed with no fuel constraints as it's testing hence the sedici being turned up to 11 "Il Qualificado" or whatever so whatever MS can do on a straight in testing is a better yardstick. There are no engine rule changes mooted in MotoGP until the end of 2005 and the Honda V5 has a theoretical ceiling of 300bhp so there's more to come....

[ehagar]

Originally posted by RedIsTheColour
There are a few factors but the most important is fuel consumption. The F1 car can use as much per lap as strategy allows but MGP bikes have 24L for the whole race and no refuelling. Capirossi did that speed with no fuel constraints as it's testing hence the sedici being turned up to 11 "Il Qualificado" or whatever so whatever MS can do on a straight in testing is a better yardstick. There are no engine rule changes mooted in MotoGP until the end of 2005 and the Honda V5 has a theoretical ceiling of 300bhp so there's more to come....

I have a feeling we will see fuel restrictions soon...

[Ninja2b]

RedIsTheColour: "Capirossi did that speed with no fuel constraints as it's testing"

Capirossi might have been doing it in testing, but I doubt they put any significant effort into mapping the engine for a "high fuel consumption mode" just so they can set speed records in testing. Id say the engineers are much more concerned with making that beast a bit more driveable/ridable in race conditions, and stopping it eating its rear tyres.

Cb

[Scoots]

On the fuel restriction ... I know a 2L reduction was on the books for this year, but don't know if it's still there. There was also talk of another 2L off next year.

The biggest speed limiter in MotoGP is the tires. Every bike on the grid makes more power than the tires can reliably put down even at incredible speeds, so the engine management is aimed at getting the tires to the end of a race.

I remember reading a review of the RCV last year when the bike did a wheelie at 150mph on it's own without the rider twisting the throttle, just from the 3/4 throttle power-band. These bikes are insanely powerful.

[Alaweni]

Here is the info you want:

Montoya vs. Sete

http://f1.racing-liv...508040953.shtml

[McLaren M20]

In the Current Issue of Sport Rider Mgazine they have a Acceleration Graph for all the Moto Bikes taken at Spain last year. They timed the bikes from 100 to 160 MPH and the Ducati was the quickest going from 100 to 160 MPH in just little over 3 seconds !! What was surprising was that the great Honda RC211V was only fourth quickest behind the Ducati,Yamaha, and the Aprilia. The top 4 bikes were very close in Acceleration followed by the Suzuki and the Proton V-5 which was over a second slower than the other bikes. Now I wonder how quick would the Ferrari F2004 or the Williams FW26 be from 100 to 160 MPH ?

[Croaky]

It's said that the MotoGP engine manufacturers could produce around 300bhp if they had to, but the engine would be so undriveable that it would be pointless. The Aprilia, which has a Cosworth designed engine, is thought to be extremely powerful but the riders just can't get the power down.
MotoGP might not beat F1 in terms of lap time, but if anyone saw the last race they'll know that MotoGP wins hands down in terms of entertainment. Just over 0.2s between 1st and 2nd place, and for 95% of the race they were within about 0.4s of each other.

[MclarenF1]

That was an incredible race. This is going to be one heck of a season, with 6 factory Honda guys all gunning for Rossi on the Yamaha....

[perfectelise]

There's no way current F1 cars could race so closely as in that fantastic MotoGP race.. The FIA should reduce aero grip in favour of mechanical grip.

[cpurvis]

In breaking the MotoGP bike is totaly crushed by a F1 car. The difference is huge!

I realize that due to contact patch limitations, lack of aero downforce, etc. that braking on a bike is not going to come close to something like an F1 car. But the above quote made me wonder how many g's of deceleration you could generate on a bike before the rider was unable to hold onto the bars / keep his butt on the seat any more? It's not like he's anchored down like an F1 pilot...

[MclarenF1]

Originally posted by cpurvis


I realize that due to contact patch limitations, lack of aero downforce, etc. that braking on a bike is not going to come close to something like an F1 car. But the above quote made me wonder how many g's of deceleration you could generate on a bike before the rider was unable to hold onto the bars / keep his butt on the seat any more? It's not like he's anchored down like an F1 pilot...

It's not limited by the riders’ ability to hold on, but the bikes inability to brake very hard without flipping over (i.e. stoppie). Bikes have a relatively high CG, and the addition of the rider raises it even more, combine that with a narrow wheelbase and it is easy to see that it doesn't take much to transfer all the weight to the front wheel. Lower the CG would help this (see Dan Gurney's Alligator) but then there are a host of other issues, which arise and make the bike more difficult to turn.

[Croaky]

Yeah, it's really the rider's ability to hold the rear wheel down, or at least judge how to maximise the braking without flipping the bike over forwards.