F1 v.s. MOTOGP (Alonso v.s. Rossi part 2)

TurboFreak650, Actually, acceleration was one question for which I sought an answer. Yes, lap times are what F1 and MotoGP are all about and F1 clearly dominates, but especially after having seen the fantastic acceleration times that Michael's Ferrari posted, I wanted to find out how the top MotoGP bikes accelerated in comparison to the top F1 cars. Several years ago (on a Busa dedicated motorcycle site) one of the most knowledgeable Busa owners posted, "nothing accelerates like F1" or words to that effect, and nobody challenged that statement; it was accepted as fact. So, to read that MotoGP hit 322 kph at Catalunya while F1 hit 310 kph is quite interesting. And I'd still like to find out just how the top F1 car and the top MotoGP bike compare in acceleration (over a variety of distances from a standing start). This won't change a thing about lap times, but it will tell a few things about acceleration.

 

The Catalunya thing means crap, the F1 cars can increase or decrease downforce and the settings can really slow a car down or vice versa...

 

My Ducati 999 will beat my Ferrari 308. Ducati 0-60mph in about 2.9 seconds, Ferrari in about 2.9 days.

 

I'm not saying he is going to be great, or bad. But to all those who shun Rossi for going from bikes to cars, remember Tazio Nuvolari Started off with bikes, and we may never ever see such driver like him again.

 

An F1 car will accelerate from say 0-100 faster than any MotoGP bike due to it's traction, but from 150 onwards, traction become less of a factor while downforce begins to work on the F1 car and NOT on the MotoGP bike.
Have you all seen the race Honda made a few years ago, with one of their MotoGP bikes one of their racing boats (sorry I, have no idea what it's proper name is) and Jensen Buttons F1 car. The F1 car ALWAYS got the better start and if I remember correctly over a mile it won twice of of three tries.