Couldn't care less if the bike was 50x slower than the F1 car, still rather watch motoGP, WSB, TT or even BTC, WRC for that matter over F1 anyday. Mind, thats not saying much, id probably rather watch Celebrity bigbrother over F1 thesedays.
There are 2 kinds of F1 vs MotoGP vids on youtube and both are in the wet! Thats bullshit. Bikes which have a smaller contact pact and only 2 wheels will spin its rear tire like a mother fucker.
Pure acceleration - Bikes are faster. Compare top speeds at circuits that both F1 and GP bikes visit. Now take into account the bikes have to brake 200metres earlier, the bikes cannot get on the power until almost fully upright out of last corner - yet the bikes still manager to get to a higher top speed with, what amounts too...a shorter straight.
@azstryde1 I think you have forgotten that F1 cars pack a huge amount of downforce... more than the cars weight pushing the car into the ground. That has a major effect on the top speed. These cars could probably get 250mph if they had no downforce.. Probably more than that to be honest
@lukezapper no it wouldn't, there were faster cars than that Toyota in a straight line, that also doesn't have a low drag wing set up. The bike lost, get over it.
all the bikers are sayin about f1 drivers movin 2 motogp then y was valentino rossi tryin 2 get an f1 drive be4 he signed with ducati...... oh yh thts it because he wanted to take part in the the fastest most popular motosport on track
lol, looking at all the bike fans here, it seems like they don't know about downforce at all and how it creates drag and about how many Gs F1s produce.
F1 drivers actually need to be more fit, because the cars turn laterally, so the drivers experience side Gs, but the Moto GP requires more work when driving, but the driver him/herself can be less fit.
When a biker leans and turns, a lot of the inertia is exerted downwards to the seat of the bike and putting a lot of the force to the wheels
@samuelesm when an F1 driver turns, all of the driver's inertia is transferred from the driver to the seat and that's it.
In a drag race, an F1 would usually always get a head start because it has two, very wide wheels, so it has more surface area which means more grip, so F1s would always have a head start in accelerating until downforce becomes an inhibitor
@samuelesm Just to inform you, they were only racing up to the front of the grid, then the F1 car lifted. The 3G's worth of drag then slowed the car down. The F1 cars can get up to 220mph with all the downforce, the bike wouldnt get anywhere near it.
@VegnagunII The f1 car did not lift before the bike did, you think so since the enginesound changed note after passing the camera, it's called the Doppler effect.
Legendary Senna and more 45 drivers more than in all moto gp class in history.Because that f1 care to safety so mutch today.F1 was a most dangerous racing chanpionship in history before Senna die.After that they care for safety so mutch.
yea, someone is saying that motogp can win F1 in racing tracks below, but trust me I work in that industry, there is NO way that motogp bikes beat F1 in racing tracks. It would be a different story if it was just 3 miles long straight. But modern F1 cars generate about 15,000N of down force at 150mph, so they can take corners much much quicker than bikes, thus can exit with much higher speed. No way, bikes, no way
actually a moto can beat a f1... this was just bs test, look at the finish line the moto was gonna pass the f1, and also there was a real test about f1 & motogp... the moto won by a couple seconds on a track... so motos are better... if you want speed i want to see f1 vs hayabusa
@Hadesxx31 lol, were u on crack or some shit? yes, the motogp would have a higher top speed due to lower amount of downforce but no way in the hell the motogp would lap faster than the f1 around the track. btw i love watching both, the f1 n the motogp.
@o0n00bz0o You mean : This F1 beat this bike in this race on wet ground ! And this race shows what a F1 can do and not what a car can do ! Did you see the vid F1 vs Veyron ? The veyron lost much much more bad than this bike !
The numbers don't lie and neither does the science. An F1 will ALWAYS brake harder into a turn, be faster in the apex, and accelerate faster out of the turn. I ride motorcycles and love Nicky Hayden, but Im not gonna lie and say that a MotoGP is anywhere near the level that an F1 is.
to @droceretik: F1 cars are much more UNaerodynamics than what motgps are, that´s why they got so much more downforce. And how can motogp reach higher top speed than F1, when they exit the corner lot slower than F1 and also motogp must brake much more earlier than F1 to the next corner??
@c4rt13r How can MotoGp have a higher top speed than F1? They can accelerate quicker due to better power to weight ratio and aero downforce on F1 induces drag which limits top speed. The superior lap time of an F1 is not derived from top speed but from higher average speed as a result of higher cornering speed, later braking and earlier acceleration. How can a MotoGP bike enter a straight much slower, then brake earlier, yet reach a similar if not higher top speed? What speeds do they reach?
Also people should stop ruining every youtube video by constantly bitching and trying to make pointless comparisons. You would think that as race fans you guys would be able to appreciate this awesome video for what it is; the very best in their respected classes having a little fun together. Everyone knows that an F1 car will turn, brake, and accelerate faster than a MotoGP bike, but its still awesome to see both of them together on a track even if for only a parade lap.
@DerrickLouie How do you figure that F1 accelerates faster than MotoGP? On many circuits MotoGP bikes post higher top speeds so that if F1 cars exit a corner onto a straight so much faster and the bikes reach a similar or higher top speed, they must accelerate quicker. People often forget that F1 cars have so much aero down force that it actually restricts top speed on most circuits. In this demo, the car had traction control and the bike lost 50 meters at the start. It only lost by 0.2 secs.
@droceretik All motogp bikes have traction control and also launch control so they are even in that respect. Also motorcycles are some of the most UNaerodynamic objects in the entire work. I interned with an engineering firm last summer and we did some work for a company making race plastics. Motorcycles above 100-120mph have terrible aero characteristics and have comparable drag to a formula car. Bikes have a large frontal area and exposed front wheel with not much mass / hp to help.
@DerrickLouie Traction control was introduced after 2007. This is a 2005 990 cc MotoGP bike and does not have traction control. It was a wet track and the bike lost 50 meters with wheelspin. You can see the bike gradually catching the car and at the finish was 0.2 seconds behind. This is a description from a Japanese reporter at the track: All Practice = dry condition result :Norick all win
Final race = wet condition(never do Race on this condition@F1 and motoGP) result :Ralf win
Respond to this video...(continued). Also you are wrong about motogp bikes having faster times than formula one cars. Look at any track that they share and motogp bikes are a good 7-14 seconds slower. The Sepang track is a good example where last year the F1's were about 10 seconds faster than bikes with both on race pace. Don't get me wrong MotoGP bikes are insanely fast and most like trap in the 1/4 around 160mph, but F1 cars have done 190mph (Road and Track). There is a big difference.
@DerrickLouie I never wrote MotoGP have quicker lap times. I wrote that MotoGP bikes have equal or superior acceleration and on some tracks post higher top speeds. The aerodynamic downforce setting on F1 restricts maximum speed more than MotoGP's inferior aero restricts their speed. I am aware that F1 cars achieve about 15% quicker lap times. I corrected your statement that "Everyone knows that an F1 car will turn, brake, and ACCELERATE faster than a MotoGP bike". This is cleary wrong.
@droceretik No motogp bikes do not accelerate faster than an F1 and definitely do not achieve higher top speeds on certain tracks. They only share a couple circuits together and in all of them the F1 is faster both in times and top speed, plain and simple. There is no discussion about it. Consider this. When Road and Track tested a 2003 Formula 1 car it did the 1/4 mile in 9 secs. flat @ 190mph. When RacerX magazine tested a 2004 Honda RC212V it did the 1/4 mile in 9.3 @ 165mph. No comparison...
@DerrickLouie You seem to have quicker and faster mixed up. Quick refers to time over a set distance ie, 9.535 sec 1/4 mile or 1min 28.234sec lap time. Fast is distance over a set time i.e. 47M/sec, 305KPH, 189MPH. What makes you the definitive encyclopedic source of motor racing facts and figures? The programs I watch, the magazines I subscribe to and the internet sites I visit all contradict some of what you write. I don't think you are as smart as you think you are. Give us your references.
@droceretik The 1/4 mile performance numbers for the Formula 1 car are from Road and Track and were conducted around 2002. I don't remember the exact issue off the top of my head, but it has the prototype RX8 on the cover. The test numbers for the motogp bike are from the world renowned magazine RacerX and is by far the leading publication when it comes to anything involving motorcycle racing. The facts about motorcycles having bad aerodynamics is just basic dynamics.
@DerrickLouie So why do MotoGP commentators frequently refer to top speeds exceeding F1? You say that RacerX is by far the leading publication on motocycle racing. That's your opinion, it is not fact. One test in one magazine does not make for a valid nor necessarily accurate performance data. There are numerous publications I read which makes my opinion just as well informed, if not more so, than yours. What of induced drag limiting F1 speed? What of reporter comments on dry practice runs?
@droceretik And just to be clear I am questioning your knowledge. You clearly said "that a MotoGP bike[s] have equal or superior acceleration and on some tracks post higher top speeds". I showed you with empirical data that this is not true. I gave you 1/4 mile times to show you that F1's were faster and even gave you lap times to show you that they are faster. Yet you can't seem to grasp the information I give you.
@DerrickLouie Here we go, official Fastest laps from Sepang, the Malaysian GP2002 MotoGP: Fastest lap 2:04.925 Top Speed 305.2 (2 bikes) Formula 1: Fastest lap 1:35.27 Top Speed 304.0 Malaysia - 2006 Loris Capirossi (MotoGP): 315.1 km/h Juan Pablo Montoya (F1) : 296.1 km/h Spain - 2006 Casey Stoner (MotoGP): 334.0 km/h Felipe Massa (F1): 319.7 km/h Clearly there are examples where bikes do accelerate quicker and have a higher top speed than f1. I know F1cars have quicker lap times by far.
(continued). Also you need to understand that a motorcycle's power delivery to the rear wheel is not the same as a car. Because a motorcycle leans in order to turn, it has to give up a certain % of available traction in order to accomplish this. As the bike becomes more upright it can allocate more and more % of these traction from being used to turn to being used to accelerate. Once it is completely upright it can then use its power 100% for acceleration. This happens AFTER the turn.
(continued 2). A car however has much more contact are and DOESN'T need to lean over in order to turn. As a result of this it is able to allocate a much HIGHER % of its traction to acceleration. So while coming out of a turn a bike is using 70% of its traction for turning and 30% for acceleration, an F1 is using 40% for turning and 60% for acceleration. This means the F1 is already on the throttle hard while the bike is still rolling onto the throttle coming out of the apex. You should get this.
@DerrickLouie Where did you pluck the 70/30%, 40/60% figures from? You must have access to F1 and MotoGP telemetry! Either that or you just make shit up. I don't need a lecture on vehicle dynamics and automotive physics. If an F1 car exits a turn at 140 kph into a 1 km straight and then reaches 310 kph at 950 meters and a MotoGP bike exits at 90 kph and reaches 310 kph before braking at 900 meters, which vehicle has accelerated harder?
dude the car would pay for an entire motogp season and motgp rider salaries almost. and come to think, the bike is limetd to 4 stoke and weight too. plus one has overtaking lol. maybe if passing wasn't such a rarity it would be a hair more interesting.
@akmedb5 Although you are right in that Formula 1 is WWWWAAAAYYYY more expensive than MotoGP, the bikes they ride still do cost more than people think. I believe that each RC212V for 2010 was estimated to cost around $4.5-$5million each just to build. This accounts for all of the materials, the man hours, and the 1000's of hours of R & D and actual machine costs. This however does not take into account the costs of actually running them and is just the costs of building them.
@RedhotIta1 F1 cars of today have 1,700 BHP per ton and can give out 22,000 RPM. Top speed your looking at 250 mph. They have that much torque they cna go from 0-170 in like 6 seconds. F1 cars would beat ANYHTING.
@NANOFORGE 1.) F1 can ARE STOPPED at 18,500 - 18,000 RPM 2)top speed is (with out wings) 430km/h in a race will be 330km/h (Monza), We'll see in 2013 ;) Turbo Engine (BMW MPower 12 used in 1982 in the BT51 Brabham)
@RedhotIta1 I've read that the current F1 cars can do 22,000 RPM but have a limited top speed of 220. That must be BS then. Still nothing can keep up with one.
@rsnoobenya Well, In Malaysia-Sepang, the difference is 25 seconds. Obviously the F1 car goes fastest. You should not underestimate the braking power of an F1 car...
Very close following lost the bike!Those bikes You can use on public streets and the F1 not!Hope all carfans saw the vid "veyron vs. F1"!Veyron lost like a lame duck!
@PulletSurprise That`s right,but the new generation of superbikes (legal for public streets) got over 200hp and under 200kg!The most of MotoGP bikes are only tuned and adjusted serial bikes for racing.But a F1 got nothing common with a streetcar.And don`t forget:All comparsions Bike-car,a bike needs always a damn good rider!A bike can only be so fast how the rider is able to do it,To drive a car is very simple!
@iM3E46 Yes.I need 2 hours in my garage to make a MotoGp legal for public streets!No way to make it with a F1 car.It`s always the same shit:A car driver lost a race against my bike and me and what did he tell?:"...if I got a veyron or a F1 I would beat You...!" Yes,and If me horse would be a cat,I could ride up into the trees!
@RacerFz1 Yeahh!And a car is faster if You change the vehicles!Give the car driver Your bike and take his car.There are no problems for You to drive his car.but he will kiss the ground latest in the first bend,perhaps sooner when he try to start with power!The only way to show a cardriver that each idiot can move a car ,but only 1% of all people can ride a bike!We can do what they can do,but they are not able to do that what we can do :-)
I like how all of the kids posting here are so defensive towards the "car" winning over the moto gp bike, probably because they are so used to seeing bikes winning races.
it's probably due to the fact the the f1 car has four tires... hum? the power to weight ratio of that moto gp bike easily has the same hp as the f1 car. the bike would just set the rear tire on fire if the moto gp rider gave it more power off the line. either that or the bike would flip over. traction won the race. good clip.
@1010thechamp How do you explain MotoGP bikes reaching higher top speeds on some circuits when the F! car exits onto the straight so much faster? Does that not mean that MotoGP bikes accelerate quicker because they are entering the straight slower yet reach a higher or similar top speed? Therefore, MotoGp bikes have a similar if not better power to weight ratio. F1 = 620 kg minimum with driver. Motogp = 150 kg +60 kg = 210 kg.
@badwee NASCAR may look like it's repetitive and doesn't require any skill but it's actually incredibly demanding for the drivers. Not more demanding then F1, I don't think, but it's still a very challenging sport, especially considering that a race may go for hours, and the difference between places measured in tenths or even hundredths of a second. Do something wrong that costs you half a mile per hour, and you'll go from second place to twenty-second place.
@toniiii9 how? moto gp riders can take corners so low their knee hits the ground and at what? 70mph? if they fall off their body could hit the wall at 50mph after rolling and they would surely suffer critical injuries or die on impact. wrc drivers definitely have to have balls, but the reason moto gp riders dont look so badass is because they are ALL going that fast. dont get it twisted man
@Refleksje Yes ,and group B drivers drive on the fine roads like TT riders.They drive 200 kph on the mud,peaces of cow shits,and the stones.Thats what i cal balls.
@AsianPerson3 Try doing turn 8 at Istanbul in Turkey. 180mph, 5G of forces going through your neck... to put that in perspective that means 5 times the weight of your head, and 5 times the weight of your 10kg helmet. You get more forces travelling through your body in F1 just by lifting off (3G's of drag) the throttle than you get in all of Moto GP.
@heretoannoy both the same size, motogp is scarier cause youre on 2 wheels and you can fall, but in F1 car you go much faster and you can crash just as hard.
@heretoannoy ...dude...you cant bail out of an f1 car...your legs can be smashed from the inside of the car, not to mention the car is much faster than the bike, and much harder to control contrary to popular belief. a car doesnt require balance, a motorcycle does. a number of things can go wrong in an f1 car so the ball size required is reversed man
@goo5976 who'd want to bail out of an F1 car!? It's constructed as a safety-cell, in carbonfibre (stronger than steel). Much much safer than being outside the car, like on a bike for instance. A crash that means certain death for a biker, an F1 driver would walk away from, unharmed.
@goo5976 there have been f1's racer who go to moto gp thinking they will dominated, they have ALL FAILED CRASHED GOT SCARED AND WENT BACK TO F1..recently as for as speed concer bikes have been going around the track faster then F1's and there is nothing as for as racing thats more dangerous then going fast on a motorcycle, your fanboy to think such there protection on a f1 if moto gp bike ever crashed at speeds that f1s do the rider would be killed instantly dumbass/ bikes are harder to control
@toniiii9 i respectfully disagree, its not like those F1 drivers are normal people like you an i those g-forces dont even affect the driver, those drivers in f1 have been trained/ and are usest to the g-forces..but lets do like this street production cars vs motorcycles, the f1 car does the same thing as a honda civic , and driving around a track on cars takes skill but as far as the most skill, rider balance, throttle control, tucking, clutch work, braking , rider postion when and how to....
@barcode0954 f1 its acceleration , decceleration, shifting , cornering and throttle control,....cars cant flip, a bike can power wheelie at up speed of 240-160mph depending on the power and how much throttle, to much throttle the bike will flip, if a bike is giving to much throttle in a turn the rear will slip up from under you and throw you off the bike, to much back brake,...you lock your brakes and the comes from under you, to much front brake and to hard your rear will lift..
@barcode0954 i ment 140* on the second post, but also rider postion is key also there so much , a street bike has same power to wieght ratio as f1, they productio 150hp on average, a moto gp has 230, plus factor in the danger of sport bikes in general! they both take skins but if you never been around bikes you really wouldnt understand the amout of skill it takes to control one at full power, unlike a car bikes dont forgive on wrong mistake an its over ...
@whitbyjet65 no problem F1 racer Michael Schumacher , tried to race , motorcycles ened up crashing...for ex. NOW lets do vise versa , lets look at much antisopated jorge lerenzo moto gp racer, going to F1 with many people calling him a major threat,...
Couldn't care less if the bike was 50x slower than the F1 car, still rather watch motoGP, WSB, TT or even BTC, WRC for that matter over F1 anyday. Mind, thats not saying much, id probably rather watch Celebrity bigbrother over F1 thesedays.
MrEvilronald 1 week ago
There are 2 kinds of F1 vs MotoGP vids on youtube and both are in the wet! Thats bullshit. Bikes which have a smaller contact pact and only 2 wheels will spin its rear tire like a mother fucker.
TurboNosHayabusa1 3 weeks ago
Put it against a racing modified Suzuki Hayabusa...
dks11000 3 weeks ago
@dks11000 motogp bikes are faster you kidding me?
sexymohms 2 weeks ago
@sexymohms yes they are!!!! topspeeds of motoGP bikes is 350km/h and in formula one the reach 330km/h this is speeds on measured on track....
ghost500e 1 day ago
Based on comments below i am launching "balls measurements service"
marcolino54321 1 month ago
Hahaha TT riders average speed 200 kph and they are going about 3 meters by walls. Yours argument are ridiculous
Refleksje 1 month ago
YEA F1 WINS BY A MILE
TheAirsoftmadman 3 months ago
On the wet the bike has a little disadvantage.
netmatrix75 5 months ago
@netmatrix75 No it doesn't, yes the car has more wheels, if it had less wheels it wouldn't be a car.
SuperGreenough 4 months ago
Jigideeeeeee!
Sharpie6413 6 months ago 7
more engineering in F1
ilion12345 7 months ago
Pure acceleration - Bikes are faster. Compare top speeds at circuits that both F1 and GP bikes visit. Now take into account the bikes have to brake 200metres earlier, the bikes cannot get on the power until almost fully upright out of last corner - yet the bikes still manager to get to a higher top speed with, what amounts too...a shorter straight.
azstryde1 7 months ago
@azstryde1 I think you have forgotten that F1 cars pack a huge amount of downforce... more than the cars weight pushing the car into the ground. That has a major effect on the top speed. These cars could probably get 250mph if they had no downforce.. Probably more than that to be honest
BlackFlag94 6 months ago
@BlackFlag94 yeeh but i think if it was a honda in that race it would beat the f1 car coz yamaha r very slow in strait line
lukezapper 5 months ago
@lukezapper no it wouldn't, there were faster cars than that Toyota in a straight line, that also doesn't have a low drag wing set up. The bike lost, get over it.
SuperGreenough 4 months ago
@SuperGreenough even if this beats gp nothin beats the isel of man tt mate fuck that
lukezapper 2 months ago
25 People MotoGP Fans xD
khaledhussain93 7 months ago
One thing I like about MotoGP is the amount of overtakes.
insight1337 7 months ago
@insight1337 HAHA! I agree. Might as well be a train, leader in first postion, carriages all follow.
mikester1290 6 months ago
all the bikers are sayin about f1 drivers movin 2 motogp then y was valentino rossi tryin 2 get an f1 drive be4 he signed with ducati...... oh yh thts it because he wanted to take part in the the fastest most popular motosport on track
chippyarcher 7 months ago
@chippyarcher probibly because the pay is better and he fanceys a change lol
joshymx125 7 months ago
BALLS REQUIRED IN F1 OOOOOOOOOOO
FERRARIAVI 8 months ago 3
@FERRARIAVI yeah lol F1 is 1000 more extreme than gp and any other motorsports
h3ndrix123 8 months ago 2
@h3ndrix123
yeah, too bad the piece of shit you drive is nothing like an f1 car and you will never be able to outrun even a slow bike.
Brian500R 8 months ago
@Brian500R He couldn't outrun my girls ninja 250 hahahahaha!!
AsianPerson3 8 months ago
@Brian500R ok Valentino rossi just take a pill and relax
h3ndrix123 8 months ago
@h3ndrix123 Indeed
PowaCrysis 7 months ago
O^O= my balls
BELSON666 8 months ago
lol, looking at all the bike fans here, it seems like they don't know about downforce at all and how it creates drag and about how many Gs F1s produce.
F1 drivers actually need to be more fit, because the cars turn laterally, so the drivers experience side Gs, but the Moto GP requires more work when driving, but the driver him/herself can be less fit.
When a biker leans and turns, a lot of the inertia is exerted downwards to the seat of the bike and putting a lot of the force to the wheels
samuelesm 8 months ago
@samuelesm when an F1 driver turns, all of the driver's inertia is transferred from the driver to the seat and that's it.
In a drag race, an F1 would usually always get a head start because it has two, very wide wheels, so it has more surface area which means more grip, so F1s would always have a head start in accelerating until downforce becomes an inhibitor
samuelesm 8 months ago
@samuelesm Just to inform you, they were only racing up to the front of the grid, then the F1 car lifted. The 3G's worth of drag then slowed the car down. The F1 cars can get up to 220mph with all the downforce, the bike wouldnt get anywhere near it.
VegnagunII 8 months ago
@VegnagunII Wrong a MotoGP bike is able to travel at around 350 km/h
slobowitz 8 months ago
@VegnagunII The f1 car did not lift before the bike did, you think so since the enginesound changed note after passing the camera, it's called the Doppler effect.
slobowitz 8 months ago
both of those must be better than sex
dieglhix 8 months ago
Bike= fun
F1 car= FUN
munsterr777 8 months ago
@munsterr777 cars don't lean over in turns... bike FTW !
ProfessorIgor 8 months ago
@ProfessorIgor Car is faster, F1 funner.
munsterr777 8 months ago
@munsterr777 a top fuel dragster will make an F1 car look like a snail, is it's "funner" ??
ProfessorIgor 8 months ago
@ProfessorIgor Faster all around, not just drag hehehehehehe
munsterr777 8 months ago
GP driver "Ok very nice you win, lets switch drives now"
CorvetteZr1S 8 months ago
Comment removed
toniiii9 9 months ago
@MrRunescapeowns2
Legendary Senna and more 45 drivers more than in all moto gp class in history.Because that f1 care to safety so mutch today.F1 was a most dangerous racing chanpionship in history before Senna die.After that they care for safety so mutch.
toniiii9 9 months ago 16
@toniiii9 what is your native language
RonaldoLancer 2 months ago
@RonaldoLancer Hrvatski,da ste pametni svi bi pricali Hrvatski da vas cijeli svijet razumije a ne bi se jebavali ovako sa google prevoditeljem.
toniiii9 2 months ago
@toniiii9 aha
RonaldoLancer 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Let seee
Find ,title on google "2010 Malaysian Grand Prix" thats F1 results and fasest lap of f1 2010 GP on Sepang circuits wikipedia
Than title "2010 Malaysian motorcycle Grand Prix wikipedia"
Thats moto GP race results,Sepang circuits and fasest lap.
((F1 2010 Malaysian GP.Sepang circuit.Fasest lap, M.Webber 1:37.054 ))
Let seee((Moto GP 2010,Malaysian GP.Sepang circuit..Fasest lap,V Rossi- 2:02.117)
Formula is aaaa- 25 sec per lap faster than Moto GP racing bike.Light year hahahah
toniiii9 9 months ago 7
r.i.p. norifumi
DCSPEED23 9 months ago
yea, someone is saying that motogp can win F1 in racing tracks below, but trust me I work in that industry, there is NO way that motogp bikes beat F1 in racing tracks. It would be a different story if it was just 3 miles long straight. But modern F1 cars generate about 15,000N of down force at 150mph, so they can take corners much much quicker than bikes, thus can exit with much higher speed. No way, bikes, no way
kensukeyokota 9 months ago 2
actually a moto can beat a f1... this was just bs test, look at the finish line the moto was gonna pass the f1, and also there was a real test about f1 & motogp... the moto won by a couple seconds on a track... so motos are better... if you want speed i want to see f1 vs hayabusa
Hadesxx31 9 months ago
@Hadesxx31 lol, were u on crack or some shit? yes, the motogp would have a higher top speed due to lower amount of downforce but no way in the hell the motogp would lap faster than the f1 around the track. btw i love watching both, the f1 n the motogp.
theunknownmankind 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hadesxx31
Hahahahah
Let seee
Find ,title on google "2010 Malaysian Grand Prix" thats F1 results and fasest lap of f1 2010 GP on Sepang circuits wikipedia
Than title "2010 Malaysian motorcycle Grand Prix wikipedia"
Thats moto GP race results,Sepang circuits and fasest lap.
toniiii9 9 months ago 3
hìhï_pässt_híer_nêt_rèin_àbá_ích_bîn_sø_eínsâm_wíll_jèmàñd_mít_míå_schréîbéñ
CutiiWynonaia675 10 months ago
I love motorcycles, been riding it since I'm young, but I have to say a motorcycle can't win a F1 ever! PERIOD! normal sportscar yes but never F1.
mi2tom 10 months ago 2
it is vert difficult to accelerate a bike, and it is even more difficult i wet floor
hbsupermage 10 months ago
it's simply not the same money invested in it
oualala75 11 months ago
SEGA!
Mrgyn 11 months ago
car kills bike- bigger most powerful engine and four tyres, more accelleration more top speed more corner speed more brake power .bike has no chance
o0n00bz0o 11 months ago
@o0n00bz0o You mean : This F1 beat this bike in this race on wet ground ! And this race shows what a F1 can do and not what a car can do ! Did you see the vid F1 vs Veyron ? The veyron lost much much more bad than this bike !
sincityracer1 11 months ago
@o0n00bz0o
True, but a bike is also much LIGHTER. That's why a 200hp Suzuki Hayabusa can easily outdrag a 630hp Porsche 911 GT2.
What matter is power-to-weight ratio, and if you have better power-to-weight ratio than the other you will accelerate faster.
Btw, you should have listened in English class. When you say more, you mean "higher".
However when it comes to cornering it's true about cars in general.
McLarenMercedes 11 months ago
Bikes > Cars!
Theres a reason Rossi picks GP over F1.
bob3rt 1 year ago
@bob3rt
lol yeah right.
popace 11 months ago
@bob3rt Yeah right, when a 2008 F1 car is probably as quick if not quicker in wet than a MotoGP car is on a dry track...
MetaKnightsKirby 10 months ago
@MetaKnightsKirby
Speed has nothing to do with my comment / opinion =]
Also I personally have never heard of a 'MotoGP Car' ?
Peace!
bob3rt 5 months ago
@bob3rt Bikes > cars implies that they are faster, and 'MotoGP car'... whoops, I love typo's.
MetaKnightsKirby 5 months ago
The numbers don't lie and neither does the science. An F1 will ALWAYS brake harder into a turn, be faster in the apex, and accelerate faster out of the turn. I ride motorcycles and love Nicky Hayden, but Im not gonna lie and say that a MotoGP is anywhere near the level that an F1 is.
DerrickLouie 1 year ago
to @droceretik: F1 cars are much more UNaerodynamics than what motgps are, that´s why they got so much more downforce. And how can motogp reach higher top speed than F1, when they exit the corner lot slower than F1 and also motogp must brake much more earlier than F1 to the next corner??
c4rt13r 1 year ago
@c4rt13r How can MotoGp have a higher top speed than F1? They can accelerate quicker due to better power to weight ratio and aero downforce on F1 induces drag which limits top speed. The superior lap time of an F1 is not derived from top speed but from higher average speed as a result of higher cornering speed, later braking and earlier acceleration. How can a MotoGP bike enter a straight much slower, then brake earlier, yet reach a similar if not higher top speed? What speeds do they reach?
droceretik 1 year ago
this is all well and good for an F1 car but can you actually get an affordable car that will beat a 13k bike?......... no is the answer
apriRs08 1 year ago
You need to be more fit in order to be able to ride a motogp to its potential.
xXyasabeXx 1 year ago
Also people should stop ruining every youtube video by constantly bitching and trying to make pointless comparisons. You would think that as race fans you guys would be able to appreciate this awesome video for what it is; the very best in their respected classes having a little fun together. Everyone knows that an F1 car will turn, brake, and accelerate faster than a MotoGP bike, but its still awesome to see both of them together on a track even if for only a parade lap.
DerrickLouie 1 year ago
@DerrickLouie How do you figure that F1 accelerates faster than MotoGP? On many circuits MotoGP bikes post higher top speeds so that if F1 cars exit a corner onto a straight so much faster and the bikes reach a similar or higher top speed, they must accelerate quicker. People often forget that F1 cars have so much aero down force that it actually restricts top speed on most circuits. In this demo, the car had traction control and the bike lost 50 meters at the start. It only lost by 0.2 secs.
droceretik 1 year ago
@droceretik All motogp bikes have traction control and also launch control so they are even in that respect. Also motorcycles are some of the most UNaerodynamic objects in the entire work. I interned with an engineering firm last summer and we did some work for a company making race plastics. Motorcycles above 100-120mph have terrible aero characteristics and have comparable drag to a formula car. Bikes have a large frontal area and exposed front wheel with not much mass / hp to help.
DerrickLouie 1 year ago
@DerrickLouie Traction control was introduced after 2007. This is a 2005 990 cc MotoGP bike and does not have traction control. It was a wet track and the bike lost 50 meters with wheelspin. You can see the bike gradually catching the car and at the finish was 0.2 seconds behind. This is a description from a Japanese reporter at the track: All Practice = dry condition result :Norick all win
Final race = wet condition(never do Race on this condition@F1 and motoGP) result :Ralf win
droceretik 1 year ago
Respond to this video...(continued). Also you are wrong about motogp bikes having faster times than formula one cars. Look at any track that they share and motogp bikes are a good 7-14 seconds slower. The Sepang track is a good example where last year the F1's were about 10 seconds faster than bikes with both on race pace. Don't get me wrong MotoGP bikes are insanely fast and most like trap in the 1/4 around 160mph, but F1 cars have done 190mph (Road and Track). There is a big difference.
DerrickLouie 1 year ago
@DerrickLouie I never wrote MotoGP have quicker lap times. I wrote that MotoGP bikes have equal or superior acceleration and on some tracks post higher top speeds. The aerodynamic downforce setting on F1 restricts maximum speed more than MotoGP's inferior aero restricts their speed. I am aware that F1 cars achieve about 15% quicker lap times. I corrected your statement that "Everyone knows that an F1 car will turn, brake, and ACCELERATE faster than a MotoGP bike". This is cleary wrong.
droceretik 1 year ago
@droceretik No motogp bikes do not accelerate faster than an F1 and definitely do not achieve higher top speeds on certain tracks. They only share a couple circuits together and in all of them the F1 is faster both in times and top speed, plain and simple. There is no discussion about it. Consider this. When Road and Track tested a 2003 Formula 1 car it did the 1/4 mile in 9 secs. flat @ 190mph. When RacerX magazine tested a 2004 Honda RC212V it did the 1/4 mile in 9.3 @ 165mph. No comparison...
DerrickLouie 1 year ago
@DerrickLouie You seem to have quicker and faster mixed up. Quick refers to time over a set distance ie, 9.535 sec 1/4 mile or 1min 28.234sec lap time. Fast is distance over a set time i.e. 47M/sec, 305KPH, 189MPH. What makes you the definitive encyclopedic source of motor racing facts and figures? The programs I watch, the magazines I subscribe to and the internet sites I visit all contradict some of what you write. I don't think you are as smart as you think you are. Give us your references.
droceretik 1 year ago
@droceretik The 1/4 mile performance numbers for the Formula 1 car are from Road and Track and were conducted around 2002. I don't remember the exact issue off the top of my head, but it has the prototype RX8 on the cover. The test numbers for the motogp bike are from the world renowned magazine RacerX and is by far the leading publication when it comes to anything involving motorcycle racing. The facts about motorcycles having bad aerodynamics is just basic dynamics.
DerrickLouie 1 year ago
@DerrickLouie So why do MotoGP commentators frequently refer to top speeds exceeding F1? You say that RacerX is by far the leading publication on motocycle racing. That's your opinion, it is not fact. One test in one magazine does not make for a valid nor necessarily accurate performance data. There are numerous publications I read which makes my opinion just as well informed, if not more so, than yours. What of induced drag limiting F1 speed? What of reporter comments on dry practice runs?
droceretik 1 year ago
@droceretik And just to be clear I am questioning your knowledge. You clearly said "that a MotoGP bike[s] have equal or superior acceleration and on some tracks post higher top speeds". I showed you with empirical data that this is not true. I gave you 1/4 mile times to show you that F1's were faster and even gave you lap times to show you that they are faster. Yet you can't seem to grasp the information I give you.
DerrickLouie 1 year ago
droceretik 1 year ago
(continued). Also you need to understand that a motorcycle's power delivery to the rear wheel is not the same as a car. Because a motorcycle leans in order to turn, it has to give up a certain % of available traction in order to accomplish this. As the bike becomes more upright it can allocate more and more % of these traction from being used to turn to being used to accelerate. Once it is completely upright it can then use its power 100% for acceleration. This happens AFTER the turn.
DerrickLouie 1 year ago
(continued 2). A car however has much more contact are and DOESN'T need to lean over in order to turn. As a result of this it is able to allocate a much HIGHER % of its traction to acceleration. So while coming out of a turn a bike is using 70% of its traction for turning and 30% for acceleration, an F1 is using 40% for turning and 60% for acceleration. This means the F1 is already on the throttle hard while the bike is still rolling onto the throttle coming out of the apex. You should get this.
DerrickLouie 1 year ago
@DerrickLouie Where did you pluck the 70/30%, 40/60% figures from? You must have access to F1 and MotoGP telemetry! Either that or you just make shit up. I don't need a lecture on vehicle dynamics and automotive physics. If an F1 car exits a turn at 140 kph into a 1 km straight and then reaches 310 kph at 950 meters and a MotoGP bike exits at 90 kph and reaches 310 kph before braking at 900 meters, which vehicle has accelerated harder?
droceretik 1 year ago
dude the car would pay for an entire motogp season and motgp rider salaries almost. and come to think, the bike is limetd to 4 stoke and weight too. plus one has overtaking lol. maybe if passing wasn't such a rarity it would be a hair more interesting.
akmedb5 1 year ago
@akmedb5 Although you are right in that Formula 1 is WWWWAAAAYYYY more expensive than MotoGP, the bikes they ride still do cost more than people think. I believe that each RC212V for 2010 was estimated to cost around $4.5-$5million each just to build. This accounts for all of the materials, the man hours, and the 1000's of hours of R & D and actual machine costs. This however does not take into account the costs of actually running them and is just the costs of building them.
DerrickLouie 1 year ago
lol i would see a F1 of 1980s xDDDD 900-1600Horse Power. More fast of today. (Turbocharged Ferrari engine)
RedhotIta1 1 year ago
@RedhotIta1 F1 cars of today have 1,700 BHP per ton and can give out 22,000 RPM. Top speed your looking at 250 mph. They have that much torque they cna go from 0-170 in like 6 seconds. F1 cars would beat ANYHTING.
NANOFORGE 1 year ago
@NANOFORGE 1.) F1 can ARE STOPPED at 18,500 - 18,000 RPM 2)top speed is (with out wings) 430km/h in a race will be 330km/h (Monza), We'll see in 2013 ;) Turbo Engine (BMW MPower 12 used in 1982 in the BT51 Brabham)
RedhotIta1 1 year ago
@RedhotIta1 I've read that the current F1 cars can do 22,000 RPM but have a limited top speed of 220. That must be BS then. Still nothing can keep up with one.
NANOFORGE 1 year ago
motogp is for faggots
facfom 1 year ago
@facfom,
Doing 200+MPH around a race track is for Faggots? Pretty manly faggots, I'd say.
neomuttley 1 year ago
Yeah, the cars are faster. But your every day Joe can't walk into a dealership and buy a Formula 1 race car for under 20 grand.
Ub3rn00berer 1 year ago
@Ub3rn00berer
Nor can your average joe have like $2m for a Moto GP M1 either
1010thechamp 1 year ago
LOL FORMULA ONE HOCHENHEIM MANSELL FORMULA CARS LAP 1 37 960 BIKE 500 GP LAP 2 05 323. OK HAJIALIBAIG
yvisa67 1 year ago
fomrula one is very fasted and the bike, formula one 0 1OO KMH 2 SECONDES.0 300 KMH 9 SECONRES
yvisa67 1 year ago
voila ki est plus coherant
yvisa67 1 year ago
At 0:09 - 0:17 is that exhaust or is that just God's mist form struggling to keep up?
JeeniusStudios 1 year ago
i always wannnnder whats the fastest aroun the track.
rsnoobenya 1 year ago
@rsnoobenya Well, In Malaysia-Sepang, the difference is 25 seconds. Obviously the F1 car goes fastest. You should not underestimate the braking power of an F1 car...
koenf1 1 year ago
wet track bro....
kacicapo 1 year ago
The car wins but ill still be watching Moto GP racing................F1 is an instant cure for insomnia...
schwantz037 1 year ago
hahahaha, motorbike vs F1... so funny!
it is sad cause this is the truth: F1 cars > Motorcycles
Kororock 1 year ago 2
ok, but who has the biggest balls?
the guy in the cage? ermmm NO #LOL
worldtravel101 1 year ago
Very close following lost the bike!Those bikes You can use on public streets and the F1 not!Hope all carfans saw the vid "veyron vs. F1"!Veyron lost like a lame duck!
sincityracer1 1 year ago
@sincityracer1
MotoGP bikes don't have lights, license plate mounts, turn signals or road-able tires. You can't use them on public streets, either.
PulletSurprise 1 year ago
@PulletSurprise That`s right,but the new generation of superbikes (legal for public streets) got over 200hp and under 200kg!The most of MotoGP bikes are only tuned and adjusted serial bikes for racing.But a F1 got nothing common with a streetcar.And don`t forget:All comparsions Bike-car,a bike needs always a damn good rider!A bike can only be so fast how the rider is able to do it,To drive a car is very simple!
sincityracer1 1 year ago
Who gives a shit, can u drive a f1 car on a road err no can u drive a gp bike on the road err yer
iM3E46 1 year ago
@iM3E46 typically u cant. it has illegal slick tyres, no number plate, no lights etc
:)
dimos47ki7 1 year ago
@iM3E46 why would you ever want to drive a gp bike on the road??? there is no point! Go to track days if you want a real rush!
Davetheravepow 1 year ago
@iM3E46 Yes.I need 2 hours in my garage to make a MotoGp legal for public streets!No way to make it with a F1 car.It`s always the same shit:A car driver lost a race against my bike and me and what did he tell?:"...if I got a veyron or a F1 I would beat You...!" Yes,and If me horse would be a cat,I could ride up into the trees!
sincityracer1 1 year ago
@sincityracer1 looool :-) and by the way, that was a fkn wet race. only situation, in which the bike can be beaten...
RacerFz1 1 year ago
@RacerFz1 Yeahh!And a car is faster if You change the vehicles!Give the car driver Your bike and take his car.There are no problems for You to drive his car.but he will kiss the ground latest in the first bend,perhaps sooner when he try to start with power!The only way to show a cardriver that each idiot can move a car ,but only 1% of all people can ride a bike!We can do what they can do,but they are not able to do that what we can do :-)
sincityracer1 1 year ago
I like how all of the kids posting here are so defensive towards the "car" winning over the moto gp bike, probably because they are so used to seeing bikes winning races.
it's probably due to the fact the the f1 car has four tires... hum? the power to weight ratio of that moto gp bike easily has the same hp as the f1 car. the bike would just set the rear tire on fire if the moto gp rider gave it more power off the line. either that or the bike would flip over. traction won the race. good clip.
alexmortillaro 1 year ago
@alexmortillaro
Hmm you poor idiot so Moto GP has better power to weight ratio?
Bike= 160kg with minimun fuel and lubricant + 60kg rider = 220kg
F1= 605kg WITH driver and all fluids
605kg with 800bhp is more than 220kg with 220bhp. Now then there's torque, drag coefficient and traction, which all areas car > bike.
1010thechamp 1 year ago
@1010thechamp How do you explain MotoGP bikes reaching higher top speeds on some circuits when the F! car exits onto the straight so much faster? Does that not mean that MotoGP bikes accelerate quicker because they are entering the straight slower yet reach a higher or similar top speed? Therefore, MotoGp bikes have a similar if not better power to weight ratio. F1 = 620 kg minimum with driver. Motogp = 150 kg +60 kg = 210 kg.
Never trust YouTube claims. Check it yourself.
droceretik 1 year ago
Car vs bike. Car wins. I rest my case.
75jeremiah 1 year ago 2
@75jeremiah bikes are cooler
jujuzac 1 year ago
@75jeremiah bikes are cooler
jujuzac 1 year ago
lol Formula 1 cars own bikes...monza lap times: F1 car: 1:22...bike: 1:50 D:
hajialibaig 1 year ago 19
@hajialibaig obviously 4 wheels , 2 wheels
600145 1 year ago
@hajialibaig LOL Formula 1 Races are so boring... there are maybe in a lap one overtake.
In Moto GP are 3 till 5 in one lap
Chrisspeeding 1 year ago
@Chrisspeeding Doesn't change the fact that they are faster than Moto GP bikes :)
F1 cars have higher acceleration, top speed, cornering speed, G-forces - you name it!
hajialibaig 1 year ago
@hajialibaig In cars and speed they rule, but they don't give you so much freedom as a bike
MattKpo 1 year ago
@MattKpo True, bikes are more fun to ride.
hajialibaig 1 year ago
@hajialibaig
just checked this year's silverstone poles:
F1 = 1.29.6
motoGP = 2.03.3
lol... not even close
joyfulvulture 1 year ago
@joyfulvulture LOL...damn. What does that work out in km/h terms?
hajialibaig 1 year ago
@hajialibaig formula 1 owns EVERY car and bike ever made
kankuro6666 1 year ago
@hajialibaig
Ball size required in F1 = o
Ball size for moto gp = O
heretoannoy 1 year ago 48
@heretoannoy
Ball size for NASCAR = .
badwee 1 year ago 2
@badwee NASCAR may look like it's repetitive and doesn't require any skill but it's actually incredibly demanding for the drivers. Not more demanding then F1, I don't think, but it's still a very challenging sport, especially considering that a race may go for hours, and the difference between places measured in tenths or even hundredths of a second. Do something wrong that costs you half a mile per hour, and you'll go from second place to twenty-second place.
/watch?v=op_EuiAZKy8
JETZcorp 1 year ago
@heretoannoy my god your saying it like you've driven an f1 car before?
aizac91 1 year ago
@heretoannoy You spelt 'Brain' wrong.
RedRocket1987 10 months ago
@heretoannoy Both balls look tiny.
fablan6 10 months ago
@heretoannoy you are so right , F1 today is very safe and you are not safe to crash in a motorbike
sampras19 10 months ago
@heretoannoy
In f1 history was die on the track more people(about 45) than in all moto class 125ccm......Moto gp... did you know that.
toniiii9 9 months ago 6
Comment removed
toniiii9 9 months ago
Comment removed
toniiii9 9 months ago
Comment removed
toniiii9 9 months ago
Comment removed
toniiii9 9 months ago
@heretoannoy
Ball size for wrc and f3000 hill climb is biger than whole moto gp circuit hehe
toniiii9 9 months ago 23
@toniiii9
...sorry for your testicular cancer :(
Amongoeth1946 7 months ago
@Amongoeth1946 :)
toniiii9 7 months ago
@toniiii9 YEAH AND TT RIDERS HAVE GOT BIGGER BALLS THAN ALL OF THEM!
mark675 4 months ago
@toniiii9 how? moto gp riders can take corners so low their knee hits the ground and at what? 70mph? if they fall off their body could hit the wall at 50mph after rolling and they would surely suffer critical injuries or die on impact. wrc drivers definitely have to have balls, but the reason moto gp riders dont look so badass is because they are ALL going that fast. dont get it twisted man
goo5976 4 months ago
@mark675
@goo5976 Watch on you tube "Lionel Regal hill climb F 3000" and then we can talk about balls :)
toniiii9 4 months ago
@toniiii9 Ball size for all isle of man TT rider and other like that are biger than whole sport car drivers. Go be stupid somewhere else
Refleksje 1 month ago
@Refleksje Wrong.One Rally group B drivers had larger balls than whole TT riders who have ever ridden stupido.
toniiii9 1 month ago
@toniiii9 You are ridiculous.. tt rider could die at all moment of race. B group drivers are in "can".. have seat belts, safety cage.
Refleksje 1 month ago
@Refleksje Yes ,and group B drivers drive on the fine roads like TT riders.They drive 200 kph on the mud,peaces of cow shits,and the stones.Thats what i cal balls.
toniiii9 1 month ago
Comment removed
toniiii9 9 months ago
@heretoannoy
Wallet size of GP = - £
Wallet size of F1 = ££££££££££££££££££££££££
starsintheirears 9 months ago 5
@starsintheirears So, what would that be converted to $?
DG121480 9 months ago
@heretoannoy Umh, no. F1 is much faster, pulling many more g's. How does that require LESS balls?
MrMorg19 9 months ago 4
@MrMorg19 When you crash you're in a car vs. whipping around and then getting hit by your bike.
brw147 8 months ago
@MrMorg19 Your strapped into a car. Your secure in a freakin cockpit. Try holding on to 230hp with your bear hands!
AsianPerson3 8 months ago
@AsianPerson3 Try doing turn 8 at Istanbul in Turkey. 180mph, 5G of forces going through your neck... to put that in perspective that means 5 times the weight of your head, and 5 times the weight of your 10kg helmet. You get more forces travelling through your body in F1 just by lifting off (3G's of drag) the throttle than you get in all of Moto GP.
VegnagunII 8 months ago 3
@VegnagunII w/e I love both sports anyways.
AsianPerson3 8 months ago
@heretoannoy brains to use a f1 O brains to use a bike . yh to bad the f1 shat on that bike
MrLuke017 8 months ago
@heretoannoy both the same size, motogp is scarier cause youre on 2 wheels and you can fall, but in F1 car you go much faster and you can crash just as hard.
mkampinga 8 months ago 3
@heretoannoy ...dude...you cant bail out of an f1 car...your legs can be smashed from the inside of the car, not to mention the car is much faster than the bike, and much harder to control contrary to popular belief. a car doesnt require balance, a motorcycle does. a number of things can go wrong in an f1 car so the ball size required is reversed man
goo5976 8 months ago
@goo5976 who'd want to bail out of an F1 car!? It's constructed as a safety-cell, in carbonfibre (stronger than steel). Much much safer than being outside the car, like on a bike for instance. A crash that means certain death for a biker, an F1 driver would walk away from, unharmed.
slobowitz 8 months ago
@slobowitz The more death racers than in ewery else racing chanpionship in history,moto,nascar,indy,wrc.... is in F1 45 death.
toniiii9 7 months ago
@goo5976 there have been f1's racer who go to moto gp thinking they will dominated, they have ALL FAILED CRASHED GOT SCARED AND WENT BACK TO F1..recently as for as speed concer bikes have been going around the track faster then F1's and there is nothing as for as racing thats more dangerous then going fast on a motorcycle, your fanboy to think such there protection on a f1 if moto gp bike ever crashed at speeds that f1s do the rider would be killed instantly dumbass/ bikes are harder to control
barcode0954 7 months ago
@barcode0954
F1 is mutch harder to control.You don have any moto gp racer who is good and fast in F1.G force on bikes are wery small and going down to rider body.
toniiii9 7 months ago
@toniiii9 i respectfully disagree, its not like those F1 drivers are normal people like you an i those g-forces dont even affect the driver, those drivers in f1 have been trained/ and are usest to the g-forces..but lets do like this street production cars vs motorcycles, the f1 car does the same thing as a honda civic , and driving around a track on cars takes skill but as far as the most skill, rider balance, throttle control, tucking, clutch work, braking , rider postion when and how to....
barcode0954 7 months ago
@barcode0954 f1 its acceleration , decceleration, shifting , cornering and throttle control,....cars cant flip, a bike can power wheelie at up speed of 240-160mph depending on the power and how much throttle, to much throttle the bike will flip, if a bike is giving to much throttle in a turn the rear will slip up from under you and throw you off the bike, to much back brake,...you lock your brakes and the comes from under you, to much front brake and to hard your rear will lift..
barcode0954 7 months ago
@barcode0954 i ment 140* on the second post, but also rider postion is key also there so much , a street bike has same power to wieght ratio as f1, they productio 150hp on average, a moto gp has 230, plus factor in the danger of sport bikes in general! they both take skins but if you never been around bikes you really wouldnt understand the amout of skill it takes to control one at full power, unlike a car bikes dont forgive on wrong mistake an its over ...
barcode0954 7 months ago
@barcode0954 Can you please name all these F1 drivers that went to Moto GP? Thanks.
whitbyjet65 7 months ago
@whitbyjet65 no problem F1 racer Michael Schumacher , tried to race , motorcycles ened up crashing...for ex. NOW lets do vise versa , lets look at much antisopated jorge lerenzo moto gp racer, going to F1 with many people calling him a major threat,...
barcode0954 7 months ago
@barcode0954 haha apart from no-one actually calls him that, do they?
stefanarak 6 months ago
@stefanarak No one calls him the major threat, but there saying if he does goes he will be a major threat..
barcode0954 6 months ago
@heretoannoy ball size for everthing else = .
MrWowforthewin 7 months ago