MotoGP quetions?

[kumpy]

1. Why are only Ducati, Honda, and Yamaha in MotoGP? What happen to Kawasaki, Aprilia, Triumph, BMW? I suppose this only applies to MotoGP1.
2. Why are engines supplied by Honda in MotoGP2?
3. What types of bikes run in MotoGP3? Honda CBR250 & Kawasaki Ninja 250?
4. Who are better riders: MotoGP, AMA, WSB? What are the differences? Is MotoGP like the World Series, SuperBowl, Stanley Cup for motorcycle racing?

[Jason P.]

i can answer a few but vaguely.

1. Why aren't Kawi and the rest in it? Too much money for them. They weren't competitive. It goes on. the other three has money and talent.
4. I say GP is the epitome of racing. Its meant for prototype engines in prototype chassis. Like F1. People can race the other series but FEW ever make it in GP. Its GP for a reason.

but i want to know the other answers too. Someone answer the good man!

[Degsy]

Wirelessly posted

The answer is it all sucks ass and it started sucking ass about 10 years ago. The riders are riding virtually uncrashable bikes that make raw talent and skill less valuable than electronic set up.

Moto 2 is passable as a series, but SBK and motoGP? Blah.

Watch some races from 1995-2000

[lrrs313]

2. Honda was chosen to be the supplier of the spec engine a few years back when the Moto2 class was created (I suspect it was a politically motivated choice, Honda has a lot of power in GP and elsewhere in racing)
3. Moto3 is prototype chassis with 250cc single cylinder 4 stroke motors that are not allowed to be based on any currently produced engine. There are other restrictions on the motors, I just can't remember them
4. MotoGP is the home of the worlds best riders. Want proof? Look what happens when a MotoGP racer leaves and goes back to World Superbike (see Max Biaggi). Or look at what Ben Spies did to the WSBK field (championship in his first and only year there), then what he has accomplished in GP (very impressive, but only one win and really not even a player in the championship hunt so far).

EDIT: and I agree (sort of) with Degsy. Electronic aids are killing the racing.

[Karate.Snoopy]

As recently as a couple of weeks back there was a statement by the Head of BMW's motorcycle racing effort which read "Honda and Yamaha are killing MotoGP and that his firm has no interest in entering the series under its current rules.BMW Motorrad Motorsport is currently focusing on the Superbike World Championship, although the Forward Racing MotoGP team is using its engines in it Suter CRT chassis."
Here is the interview
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/b...102122946.html

[SVRACER01]

funny how the ebb and flow of racing goes. when ama sucked moto gp was where it was at. now id rather watch ama 600 or moto2 any day.

[Kurlon]

Moto 3 does not restrict to non-production engines. They just limit revs, and cost of the engine.

[kumpy]

Wirelessly posted

The answer is it all sucks ass and it started sucking ass about 10 years ago. The riders are riding virtually uncrashable bikes that make raw talent and skill less valuable than electronic set up.

Moto 2 is passable as a series, but SBK and motoGP? Blah.

Watch some races from 1995-2000

I used to follow MotoGP500 from early 90s through early 2000. I use to watch tons of motorcycle racing from that era when I first got into motorcycling. I was obsessed with the Kawi ZX7R running with the 916s, the Gixxer SRADs, Smokin Joe's Honda! From what I noticed racing on TV now, seems like bikes rear ends slide way more going in and coming out of corners. The whole sticking your leg out before going into a corner freaks me out, and I don't ever remember seeing guys leaning over and getting their elbows down to the ground!

[PhilB]

1. Why are only Ducati, Honda, and Yamaha in MotoGP? What happen to Kawasaki, Aprilia, Triumph, BMW? I suppose this only applies to MotoGP1.

Those are the three that choose to spend the money. Honda and Yamaha can afford it, like the ultimate prestige, and have long histories in it. Ducati can't really afford it; they entered in 2006, and I think they got in to try to develop their monocoque "frameless" design, and probably ought to get out. Suzuki and Kawasaki used to have teams, but both became uncompetitive and decided to leave the series within the last few years rather than spend the money to keep up. Aprilia made a couple tries, but never got anywhere. Triumph and BMW and all the rest have not been involved in modern times. The new CRT bikes are an attempt to get more bikes on the grid, using price-limited engines and prototype chassis. They are uncompetitive at this point. They are powered by a variety of engines, vaguely production-based, from Aprilia, BMW, and a couple others, but are not really factory supported. MotoGP currently uses a spec tire, fuel limits, and various other arbitrary rules, that have turned it in recent years into a complete clusterf**k, and it may soon disappear entirely. (This last, obviously, is my opinion, but you just wait and see.)

2. Why are engines supplied by Honda in MotoGP2?

MotoGP switched several years ago from 500cc 2-stroke to big (800cc to 1000cc, depending on year) 4-stroke motors, as 2-strokes are largely irrelevant to anything else in the world. The second GP class was still 250cc 2-stroke, though, for quite a while. The GP brass decided to change it to a 600cc 4-stroke formula, to make it more relevant to bike development, and to make it a better feeder class to MotoGP; this happened just three years ago. For the new formula, to try to contain costs, they decided on a spec engine, and awarded that contract to Honda. It provides some very close and exciting racing, and is providing some riders to MotoGP, so that part is working. OTOH, the bikes are largely indistinguishable and nobody cares about them.

3. What types of bikes run in MotoGP3? Honda CBR250 & Kawasaki Ninja 250?

Moto3 is new this year, to replace the previous 125cc 2-stroke GP class. It uses specially built 250cc 4-stroke singles, which may be supplied by various manurfacturers. A lot of them are KTMs, I think. None of them are based on the 250s from Honda or Kawasaki, or any other production bike. (The Ninja 250 is a twin, and wouldn't be eligible anyway.)

4. Who are better riders: MotoGP, AMA, WSB? What are the differences? Is MotoGP like the World Series, SuperBowl, Stanley Cup for motorcycle racing?

MotoGP is the world's top motorcycle racing class; they are the best riders there are. WSB and Moto2 are the next level; hard to tell which of those two has the best. AMA and BSB and other national level superbike series are the third rank.

PhilB

[jwm2k3]

World Superbike is my current favorite. Used to be the 500 two strokes, I even liked the 990cc Motogp class, but once they went to 800....i found myself watching less and gravitating to WSBK. I like the ama, but all my favorite racers are gone now...Mladin, Duhamel, etc....

[SquadraCorse]

I think Moto2 has the formula down perfectly. The racing is intense from when the lights go out to the checker. It's affordable (by world level standards) and it has a massive field. It's by far my favorite to watch.

The cost of running a prototype effort in MotoGP is astronomical. Hence the CRT effort this year which is mainly putting a bunch of back markers on the grid to fill it up. Complete waste of time in my opinion and I feel like it dilutes the prestige of the series. I feel like you have to have a top level series that pushes the technical boundary, but if you can't fill up the grid then what's the point. Formula 1 also nailed the formula this year and has created a different winner basically every race, and made sure that the races didn't turn into fast paced parades. MotoGP needs to do more to get other manufacturers in reduce costs.

[NeverlosT]

i actually learned quite a bit here, good questions and good answers.

[CBR929RE]

take away Crutchlow and Dovisioso and MotoGP probably wouldn't even be worth setting the DVR