| Author | Message | ||
     Nsbuell |
Just a general question that I'm too lazy to look up myself...which one will post a quicker lap time on any given track? an F1 car or a Moto GP bike? Anyone know offhand? Does it depend on the track? Shumacher vs. Rossi who wins??? | ||
| Socalbueller |
I'm guessing the F1 car since they got 4 huge sticky tires opposed to 2 kind of small ones. However moto gp is more fun to watch. | ||
| Garp |
I think the big differences are the braking and the downforce. Those cars are stuck like glue, and can hit 4G under braking | ||
| Imonabuss |
F1 by a huge amount. Don't even look at the times, it's too depressing. And here we thought we were fast. | ||
| Mutt2jeff |
F1 car by far, it wouldn't even be a race. The downforce those cars create is huge. I seem to recall that after they hit 70 mph, an F1 car can drive upside down, from the forces they make. | ||
| Jima4media |
Two words - contact patch one word - downforce Watch the lap times of the upcoming Catalunya MotoGP race. Fisichella holds the Formula 1 lap record at 1:15.6. Comparing Shanghai China Formula 1 is 1:32 versus 1:59 for bikes. That was during dry practice. The other track the both bikes and cars are using this year is Sepang Malasia. (Message edited by jima4media on June 10, 2005) | ||
| M1combat |
I looked around and found that at just about every track that is run by both F1 and Moto-GP including the test tracks... The F1 cars were faster by about... Wait for it... THIRTY SECONDS A LAP. Garp - They can hit four lateral G's as well  . The cars have JUST under 1000HP and weigh 600 kilos. I think that the Toyota, Ferrari and Cosworth engines could make 1000 and do it "mostly" reliably, but it needs to perfectly reliable in that game. They spin them to nearly 20K RPMs (should be about 24K RPM's next year with the new V8 engine config). They make about 300-315lbs of torque at their torque peak (a VERY closely guarded secret). Wood is still used in the construction of the car. Toyota's budget for the '05 season is reported to be greater than $1,000,000,000... There are no "ball joints" or anything like them in the suspension. They rely on the flex of the carbon fiber control arms because this reduces sticktion... VERY smart fellers those F1 engineers... Some teams run CF gear boxes (The other teams don't win...). McLaren uses two clutches... One of them PRE-selects the next gear... I still can't figure out exactly why... Pretty much the entire field switches gears in .0016 seconds... How much RPM can you lose in that amount of time? I suppose every little bit helps . There were SEVEN springs in the suspensions sytem at each end until recently... They now use combinations of springs that are "like" our clutch springs where they used to use coil overs (three at each end). Every tire is made by hand. Michael Shumacher is the second highest paid athlete on the planet... Second to Tiger Woods. MS should be the first athlete to pull in one BILLION dollars over his career... Some of the other drivers pay for their rides . The exhaust headers (made by hand... each one... out of hand shaped/polished Ti alloy plates ) gets hot enough that it gets transparent on the long straights. Ferrari's Dominance over the last seven years was due to the fact that Shell had developed light weight oil and Fuel (another VERY closely guarded secret)... I'm not sure anyone knows just how "fast" an F1 car would be if you tuned the body for speed. In 1967 - Over half of the field of drivers died. In 1968 - The use of seat belts became common. sorry... I'm a race fan , I like everything but NASCAR (and I'll watch that at Daytona and Bristol) and Drag racing (But I do like to watch the AAA's at night). Oh yeah... Due to a technique called "suspension jacking" the tires are fooled into believing that the CG is about 12' below the pavement. The tires act as if the body were rolling into the corner... VERY smart fellers . (Message edited by m1combat on June 10, 2005) | ||
| Simond |
The MotoGP bikes were actually hitting a higher top speed in testing at Catalunya than the F1 cars but that is largely due to the downforce that makes the cars stick to the road around the rest of the track. Red Bull Racing are still after Rossi for 2007........ (Message edited by SimonD on June 10, 2005) | ||
| Ingemar |
Whenever downforce is mentioned here its about F1 cars. Don't you guys think the fairings of Gp bikes create downforce? I don't know for sure but I would be really surprised if downforce isn't an important factor in engineering those fairings. | ||
| M1combat |
I don't think so (although I may indeed be wrong ). After 45 degrees of lean, you would have more force pushing you out of the turn than onto the pavement. I think with bikes the name of the game is just plain old reduction of drag. Not generating lift or downforce. Of the two, seems how Moto GP bikes spend plenty of time at > 45 degrees of lean, I think I would go for a little lift... | ||
| Mutt2jeff |
The ability to slice through the air with as little resistance as possible is the goal of a M GP bike. | ||
| Blake |
The one advantage a bike has is the single track in effect widening the turns. At a track like Barber, the bikes might have a better showing versus an F1 car. I agree, the down force and low overall CG of the F1 cars is what gives 'em the big advantage over a bike. Remove the front and rear wings and the ground effect shrouding and the bike wins. Bikes don't do down force... yet. Give Erik Buell a little more time with that one. | ||
| Bomber |
the bike rules around bodywork are holdovers from the 50s, to a lrge degree -- compared to F1 cars, our scoots are barn doors, cd-wise the comparison is intersting, to be sure, but not apples and apples (or even apples to oranges) the moeny and tech put into an F1 effort is huge in comparison to a bike effort (compared to most countries GMPs, for that matter) apples and phish, mebbe ;-} as for downforce, I'd love to see the engineering needed to creat equal downforce when the scoot in upright, and banked over hard on level pavement, and running on banking like at Daytona -- you get the idea -- tough, though I'm sure doable with enough money and time Blake's right about more room on a given track, which is one of the reasons on a back road, nuthing but a Group 3 rallye car can keep up with a bike | ||
| Glitch |
Moto GP to be limited to 800cc next year will slow them a little more. | ||
| Jima4media |
Blake, Remove all the plastic on a F1 car and it will still beat a bike. By a big margin. Bomber, You are right, today's bike designs are hold-overs from the 50's when rules changes eliminated aerodynamic designs in order to make them slower. Glitch, MotoGP will be limited to 800cc in 2007. Jim | ||
| M1combat |
Plastic? | ||
| Jima4media |
Melandri Quickest MotoGP Rider Friday At Catalunya Jun 10, 2005 From Roadracing World Publishing, Inc. Friday Afternoon MotoGP Practice Times: 1. Marco MELANDRI, Honda, 1:43.317 2. Makoto TAMADA, Honda, 1:43.408 3. Colin EDWARDS, Yamaha, 1:43.467 4. Nicky HAYDEN, Honda, 1:43.638 5. Loris CAPIROSSI, Ducati, 1:43.885 6. Valentino ROSSI, Yamaha, 1:44.030 7. Max BIAGGI, Honda, 1:44.145 8. Troy BAYLISS, Honda, 1:44.430 9. John HOPKINS, Suzuki, 1:44.444 10. Alex BARROS, Honda, 1:44.490 11. Sete GIBERNAU, Honda, 1:44.502 12. Shinya NAKANO, Kawasaki, 1:44.508 13. Kenny ROBERTS, Suzuki, 1:44.668 14. Carlos CHECA, Ducati, 1:44.895 15. Roberto ROLFO, Ducati, 1:45.254 16. Alex HOFMANN, Kawasaki, 1:45.314 17. Ruben XAUS, Yamaha, 1:45.374 18. Shane BYRNE, Proton KR, 1:46.321 19. Toni ELIAS, Yamaha, 1:47.746 20. James ELLISON, Blata, 1:47.857 21. Franco BATTAINI, Blata, 1:48.387 How does a 1:43 compare to a 1:15? | ||
| Jima4media |
Yes plastic. Carbon Fiber and Fiberglass is made with polymer plastic. It is the main ingredient, other than carbon or fiber. http://www.chemistrydaily.com/chemistry/Carbon_fiber (Message edited by jima4media on June 10, 2005) | ||
| M1combat |
Gotcha. | ||
| Glitch |
MotoGP will be limited to 800cc in 2007. Oh, there I go again getting ahead of myself. | ||
| Blake |
Jim, How do you conclude that an F1 car lacking any aerodynamically beneficial components would be quicker around a track than a MotoGP machine? My thinking is that the single track of the bike will allow it to achieve significantly higher cornering speeds, thus later braking, higher speeds, earlier acceleration. In effect there are some chicanes and/or kinks on tracks that for a motorcycle are inconsequential; the bike can ramain WOT by virtue of its single track, where for a car they require careful negotiation via significant braking/steering inputs. What am I missing? No downforce, no advantage. Wide dual track vehicle, radius of turns is reduced. | ||
| Imonabuss |
Blake, What you are missing is rubber. Huge, huge patches of rubber! And horsepower. Better power to weight ratio in F1. And, yes, F1 cars would kill the MotoGP bikes at Barber. Having raced F1 bikes, and talked to Indy car drivers from the same era, you can't imagine the turns they take flat out for which we would brake and downshift multiple times. But rest assured that car drivers are missing one thing that bike racers have, oops, excuse me it's two things (usually). | ||
| Craigster |
At one time the lap record at Loudon was held by a kart. That was back when GP1 was run here in the states. Think about that: A single speed, zero downforce enhanced, 135cc TKM powered four wheeler was quicker than a 500cc four cylinder two stroke bike around that tight little track. They don't have to back off for corners. | ||
| M1combat |
I think it comes down to a rubber:weight ratio. The reduced drag enabled by removing the wings would allow F1 cars to attain MASSIVE speed (this is of course if we conveniently forget that the cars would most likely have enough lift that it would be ugly at higher speeds anyway...). One thing to consider is that the F1 cars have some EXCEEDINGLY trick suspension systems. Not that the MGP's don't, but they are stuck with a fairly standard or at least uniform setup. I think that the tire compound would also be a pretty sizable advantage for the F1 cars. I'm pretty sure that Michelin isn't using all of their F1 tech in MGP. Blake does have a point about the proper line between bikes and cars, but IMO it is an advantage at most tracks to the cars... The reason I believe this is that the F1 cars (on most tracks) are capable of putting 1/2 of the car in the grass. At the least they'll put a tire in the grass. This would put the center of the car either even with, or about 3 feet inside of the bike line. The bikes don't seem to react well to rumble strips whereas the cars seem to handle them pretty well at all but the highest speeds. Long corners... Not so much, but I think that the power:weight: patchsize relationship would give the F1 cars an advantage there as well, just not mid corner. I think the F1 cars would lose on the brakes unless they allowed more dive than is currently possible. I would predict that the F1 cars would still be five to ten seconds faster, with the gap growing the tighter the track (like Monaco for instance). What do MGP bikes weigh? | ||
| Moboy516 |
I think that MotoGP bikes weigh a minimum of 330 lbs. I'm not positive though. | ||
| Tommy_2stroke |
I don't know whether bikes or cars would be faster around any track, even though I watch plenty of both forms of racing. What I DO know is I almost never react to F1 the way I do to MotoGP... at least twice in every GP bike race, I find myself leaping out of my chair and shouting at the TV. That kind of excitement is rarely supplied by F1, which, for all its fabulous technical sophistication, has become rather sterile... Bike racing at the pro level is the best spectator sport by far. | ||
| Jima4media |
Blake, You are forgetting the power of 4 large disc brakes on a F1 car. They can all but lock them up on every corner if they have to. Have you ever seen the size of the rotors on a F1 car? If you remove the bodywork, the car is still less than the height of the tires, so that in and of itself is very aerodynamic. After you remove the bodywork, the car is also lighter. Bigger horsepower to weight ratio will allow you to accelerate faster, and again lighter weight allows you to brake faster. The downforce of the bodywork only works on the corners, it is a detriment on the straightaways. 30 seconds PER LAP is a lot of time difference between F1 and MotoGP. Imonabuss, you are right, big brass ones, but a lot of riders are now switching to titanium or carbon fiber.  | ||
| Wyckedflesh |
If you removed all of the plastic from an F1 car, it would be pretty damn slow...since nothing would be attached together... | ||
| Bandm |
Everything you ever wanted to know about F1 http://www.f1technical.net/index.php Enjoy Mark | ||
| M1combat |
"The downforce of the bodywork only works on the corners, it is a detriment on the straightaways. " Not quite true... The downforce is one of the main reasons that the brakes work so well. Also, they allow you to put 1000HP down a LOT earlier. Most of the components of the car are mounted to the undertray (Which is CF/Plastic...). For our experiment we would have to modify the undertray to remove the thousands of pounds of downforce it generates. We do have to take some liberties ... we can't remove the undertray . This link is pretty neat... It uncovers and explains some of the neat little tricks that the teams come up with for each race... http://www.formula1.com/insight/technical_analysis/race/2005/739/139.html |
