F1technical.net

Saw on website motogp 4 cylinder the bike rossi rides around 240bhp weighing 150kg. over 1000/bhp tone. formula one is simular power to weight which would win in a straight line quater mile? i reakon the bike

Well, maybe. F1 cars have a lot of downforce, thus better grip. They also have a large drag.

For example, Pro Stock bikes have a WR of 6.777 seconds (actually, achieved last Friday, by Héctor Arana), I believe they have 320-330 HP (and just one gear). They weight 615 pounds minimum (for V Twin 160 cu.in) or 279 kg. This means 1.18 hp/kg (or 1180 hp per tonne, as you put it). They reach almost 320 kph and they would beat easily an F1 car for the 4 blocks. Of course, that's nothing compared with Top Fuel bikes: they have well over 1000 HP, more than an F1.

Pro Stock world record last year (by Ed Krawiec)
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA2sza-HQyw[/youtube]

Top Fuel bike (not NHRA, but European Dragsters). Do... not... blink
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kvd-bWvBG-U[/youtube]

A Formula One car reaches 320 kph in over 10 seconds.

Last part of the curve (extreme right) shows Fisico at Melbourne going from 70 to 300 or less in over 10 seconds. I have no idea if that's the straight, but I'd guess so


For comparison, Dani Pedrosa holds the world record in Moto GP with a top speed of 349 kph.

On the other hand, ProStock bikes have wheelie bars and large slicks (larger than MotoGp, which have V shaped tyres, unlike ProStock which are flat).

The times I could get for Moto GP indicate a 0 to 320 kph of 10 seconds also.

I'd guess that if a Formula One car could be optimized for drag racing they would use less wing, beating (perhaps) the Moto GP bike, because they could have better grip (with some tweaking to reduce drag but not that much).

Hard to say.

For the MotoGP bike you need to add some weight for the rider, then work out the power/weight ratio. F1 cars are weighed with driver.

F1 cars have downforce which helps with traction after a while, but a bike has great weight (load?) transfer to the rear wheel which maximises traction very well.

It would be interesting. Quite likely the bike will win the first part of the race and the car will catch it towards the end.

Both are v.quick!

Not sure how this bike compares to the MotoGP stuff but...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEbQzdzV7gs[/youtube]

Quite interesting graph Ciro, where did you get that from?
Sad the time scales so rough we can hardly read exact times from that.
The extreme right part of the curve should be the last part of the track (start/finish straight) but it’s not the straight alone. As you can see there is a buckle in the graph. This is the last bend on the track. The lowest point is the bend before that (second last bend) and one of the slowest point on the track. So I am not sure if this section is that representative for a F1 max acceleration. A graph from Monza track would be much better for a comparison.

We can assume that both vehicles have enough power so the one with more grip will accelerate faster. Important is the static load distribution front to rear. I think RH is right the higher load transfer to the rear will bring the advantage for the bike in fist part.

Just_a_fan wrote:Not sure how this bike compares to the MotoGP stuff but...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEbQzdzV7gs[/youtube]

haha that bikes really fast, when the front wheel cums up under hard accelration does that cost them a lot of speed? or no beacuse the rear wheel is still in contact?
susspose the formula one is faster lol

Just_a_fan wrote:Not sure how this bike compares to the MotoGP stuff but...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEbQzdzV7gs[youtube]

Well - V10 F1 car, more power than today (I wonder if it makes much difference in a traction limited race?)

Hopefully a MotoGP bike will be quicker, they at least have anti-wheelie now, which gives a slight edge. Although it does it's trick by limiting power - just gives the rider less to worry about, keeps the front wheel closer to the ground - which will let it use a little more power.

A bike with the front wheel off the ground cannot accelerate very hard otherwise you just rotate until you fall off!! The higher the wheel the less you can (dare) accelerate. A wheel just skimming to road is about optimum. Wheelies severely limit acceleration.

On this basis it looks like the car would win a drag race.

mep wrote:Quite interesting graph Ciro, where did you get that from?

Reca, at this forum.

I recall one of those publicity stunts, 95 or maybe 96 when a Tyrrell Yamaha pulverized (in terms of laptime) a 500cc Yamaha WC bike.

The excuse was cars DF that gives a huge edge in braking and turning. Aceleration was pretty close.

No WC bike, but interesting-Hayabusa:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgQYChHNv9o[/youtube]

Going 400 km/h:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IxSjuMUCE[/youtube]

Acceleration above 300 km/h:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpQP4v_Z0nQ[/youtube]

Tnx ciro

Tnx ciro.

You have to erase the last part of the link, from the "&feature..." on and change "youtobe" to "youtube".

nhra pro stock motorcycles are not single speed, they are air-shifted 5 speeds.

Thanks, terribleone. What do you mean by air shifted?

Ciro Pabón wrote: What do you mean by air shifted?

http://www.mpsracing.com/products/MPS/autoshift.asp