FIA should watch Sunday's MotoGP race...

...over and over...and over again. Unbelievable; 50 overtakes by the top four riders—Lorenzo, Marquez, Rossi, and Iannone. If F1 had that kind of epic potential every race, fans would come in droves.

 

with out a doubt that was the best motor race I have seen in a decade. Iannone hit a seagull on lap 2 and still finished on the podium, also made a great pass on Rossi and Marquez at the same time... however I must digress a little, as good as motogp has been this season it, the current rules are way more messed up then F1, though that is about to change in the coming seasons.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

There is no doubt that MotoGP is 10 times more exciting to watch than F1.

As a show, it has hardly any equal, with the exception of sprint cars and speedway maybe, and it costs a fraction of the price of F1 budget.

 

An amazing race!

The last lap alone was worth the wait.

Bravo MotoGP... Bravo!

 

I haven't missed a MotoGP race in several years now. It blows F1 out of the water in terms of action.

 

Skinny vehicles,
lots of power,
tires with a life just about equal to a whole race,
no aerodynamics;
That is about what it would take to have similar action in F1.

 

actually the Ducati bikes have wings on the front now

 

I'm sure the lower ones also have the function of letting the rider know when he's getting his knee down too much as the bike would just slide away without it.

 

It was an epic race but apples and oranges. MotoGP is more similar to taxi racing than F1.

If F1 should gain anything from MotoGP it would be the on screen graphics.

 

No doubt about it. MotoGP is epic this year. Titanic battles every race. At least 3 teams in with a chance of victory. A formula where the rider plays a key role in determining whether he wins or not through his race craft and strategic brain - they aren't being driven by remote control from the pits. Fantastic tv coverage with superb cameras on the bikes which tilt as the bikes crank over and tremendous graphics. It's superb. I will be going to a MotoGP race next year and ditching F1.

 

Come on, guys, it seems like you are new to motor racing. In bikes there always have been a lot more overtaking than in F1, even in the best race of the best season of the golden age of Formula 1.

 

Taxi racing? I don't even know what that means.

It is not apples to oranges. It is the highest level of racing in the car and motorcycle world.

Big difference is in MotoGP, it is 80% the rider, 20% the bike, whereas in F1, it is the opposite.

 

Nascar!..... paint 'em all yellow and most folks couldn't tell 'em from an NYC taxi!

Conversely, I've been in a few NYC taxis over the years where the driver figured he was Jimmy Johnson too!

Probably about right. However, as noted somewhere else, they're *so* slow thru the turns it's almost embarrassing - Again, tiny contact patches does not make for high speed cornering. Sure, they accelerate like nothing else, but again it's "just physics" - Much power + light weight = Fast acceleration.

Cheers,
Ian

 

There are only 2 teams in MotoGp that have won races in the last couple seasons. there are plenty of good riders in the field, but only the factory hondas and yamahas have a realistic shot at winning. though ducati has improved a bit this season.

 

Don't forget traction control...without it, they'd NEVER get that power to the ground. TC also makes the bikes sound atrocious. Last race I attended I had Indy Turn 9 seating where they essentially accelerated directly away from us after exiting turn 9...they sounded like the engines had a bad miss (which they did...controlled by the computer).

IOW...a great deal of the "80% rider" is made possible by a driver's (rider's) aid.

 

Yeah, and they should ban that immediatly before MotoGP is taken over by clever aerodynamicists and waste millions on wind tunnels.

Look what happened to F1.

 

Wow!

I (obviously ) don't follow it, but just kinda figured if radios were banned, that kind of clever **** would be too!

+1

I recall the same "nastiness" there when Michael won. We were at T1, & they all simply floored it at (ahead of?) the apex & "let the 'puter sort it out"...... They then burped & farted off into T2.....

They were quick though......

Interesting indeed......

Cheers,
Ian

 

The only ones that see any similarity between Motogp and F1 are people that don't ride bikes.
Do you realize that a rider's weight is 30-50% of the entire bike? Even at 65kg it is about 35% of the bike. That weight sits on top of the bike and influences the whole handling of the bike. Just imagine 300kg on top of a F1 engine cover that swings left to right.
Riders will always be a crucial part of the performance no matter how much electronics/aerodynamics are added to the motorcycles.

Combine that with other physical differences and you get a difference that is bigger than apples to oranges.

 

As an avid MotoGP fan, I think the sport has really moved closer to F1 in the last decade, stricter rules dictated by the manufactures, the bikes are way more similar now then they were when the series began in 2002. there is also a similar tire situation going on in the sport.

There will be big changes next year
Standard ECUs
no open class
each of the 6 factory teams (honda, yamaha, ducati, suzuki, aprilia, and KTM) will have their 2 factory bikes, but also be obligated to provide 2-4 bikes for lease to other teams, with a cap at 24 bikes.

 

That's funny - I have been riding bikes for years. Nobody is stating that they are similar in the man/machine interaction, and anyone can come to that determination, whether you ride bikes or not.

 

That's weird because on MotoGP forums you read quite frequently complaints about rules, tyres, the good old days, ownership, teams coming and going, television subscriptions services, more races/tracks moving east and insane manufacturer team budgets.

 

That interaction between man/machine is where you get the difference that you estimated to be 80% rider, 20% bike and opposite for F1. It's obviously not that high, otherwise we would have other bikes competing for wins. Honda and Yamaha have been dominating lately.

Other than being at the top of their motorsport division and both series being raced on circuits around the world, what exactly do you see in common?

1. F1: 650kg
Motogp: 160kg

2. F1: 850-900hp?
Motogp: 240-250hp

3. F1: 180cm wide
Motogp: 65cm

4. F1: approximate contact patch for 1 tire 17cm x 27cm
Motogp: 5cm x10cm

5. F1: 1200-1800kg of downforce
Motogp: ? minimal not worth mentioning

6. F1: 5g
Motogp 1-1.5g

7. F1: Driver is strapped in the car with minimal movement
Motogp: Rider is on top and influences the whole performance/handling of the machine with his weight/body positioning

8. Center of gravity differences

9. Aero/electronic technology

Those are just some of the basic differences. I'm always amazed when people start bringing up F1 vs Motogp. It's a HUGE difference.

The questions, comparisons, lack of racing, etc. should be F1 vs lower series/karting.

 

This.

If you get down to the specifics of any motorsport like you did, then none would have any similarities to the other.

 

Specifics? Those are some big and obvious differences. Go ahead and keep believing that motorcycle and car racing are very similar.
How many Motogp riders made into F1 and vice versa?
Very very few. I only know one person that did it successfully.

 

You are reading way beyond what I said. Go back and read post #12. I stated in what ways they are similar. You seem to have a need to keep diving deeper. I never said they are similar in mechanics, design, configuration, or ability required to drive/ride, so don't know why you keep harping on this....... At this point, you are having a conversation with yourself.