Is Modern MotoGP better than the 500cc GP Championships of the 70's/80's ?

[Hawk]

Hi guys!

I'm going to say something that a few of you younger guys will probably think is a crazy thing to say, but I'm going to say it anyway because I think most of us older guys believe this to be true.... so let's get a good debate going here...

"Modern MotoGP bikes are easier to ride than the great 500cc GP bikes of the heyday years of motorcycle racing".

Listen to someone who really nows the deal: http://youtu.be/D79UuvNlxFA   1min 5secs into the video, King Kenny Roberts talks about the difference between modern racing bikes compared to the old 500cc two stroke machines....

Why on earth don't we get back to the 500cc GP Blue Ribbon event of motorcycle racing? I hope we do!

[Alby46]

i'm 16... but i already knew this!

[Hawk]

i'm 16... but i already knew this!

Nice one, mate! I thought I might be on my own with this one... You know your stuff, Alby.. Welcome aboard!

[HornetMaX]

At the same time he says (if I got it right) that it's harder to make a lap time with modern bikes, because they have a lot of traction and because you get a "warning" only when you are as close as it gets to the limit.

MaX.

[Hawk]

At the same time he says (if I got it right) that it's harder to make a lap time with modern bikes, because they have a lot of traction and because you get a "warning" only when you are as close as it gets to the limit.

MaX.

Hi Max.
I understood him as saying that the modern bikes are a lot easier to ride, they have a lot more grip than the 500cc machines did, a lot easier to control than the 500cc bikes, and the warning you get on the modern bikes(ie, warning that it's gonna lose grip or maybe chuck you off, I presume) is about as good as your ever gonna get on a bike. Yes he did say that it's harder to make a lap time because of the better grip, but that I really do not understand? Maybe you would enlighten me on that comment because to me, if you have plenty of grip then surely a lap time is easier to make? Maybe I misunderstood or just don't understand Kenny about what he was talking about concerning the better grip and making a lap time? As I said, maybe you can explain it to us, Max?

[HornetMaX]

I'm not 100% to get right what he's saying (english is not my native language).

At 1:30 he says that "[the modern bikes] are not near as exciting and a lot easier to ride" (which is indisputable to me).

But right after he adds "I would say a little more difficult to go right to the lap time, cause there's a lot of grip. It doesn't bend and wobble and move around".

"The stuff that I rode, you took it to the limit was .. how you could hang on, you know".

[Journalist] "And you got a little bit of warning".

"Yeah. And the traction was anywhere close to what it is now".

"The warning system right now is really about as close I think you'll ever gonna get."

To me he means that modern bikes allow the rider to ride extremely close to the limit most of the time, as the bike behavior is more predictable and less abrupt.
To make a good lap today you have to be right on the limit a lot more than before.

Sort of "today it's easier to go fast, but harder to go very fast".

The traction thing may look strange first sight, but if your grip is lower, you automatically have to go slower.

One thing that is often forgotten by 500cc 2-strokes fan is that today's bikes differences come from many more things than the sole engine.
Tires are much much (much) better. Frames are incredibly better. Brakes too (probaly to a lesser degree compared to tires and frames).
And there's electronics: have you seen today's race in valencia ? On the main straight the riders were accelerating with the front wheel 10cm off the ground for like 600 meters.
That's not doable by a human (with that precision, on every lap): the bike accelerates as fast as the physic allow, no more, no less.

I guess that the general idea is that bikes from the 80-90s were more "gutsy": brave riders not caring a lot about broken bones.
Today the whole thing seems a bit more "sane", but when you have reasonably close bikes and riders, there's still plenty of show to look at.

MaX.

P.S.
Don't put too much value in my "explanations", just my opinion: I may (may) have some technical understanding, but I've never put my wheels on a track, so ...

[C21]

From my point of view:
KR: "The stuff that I rode, you took it to the limit was .. how you could hang on, you know".!
Means that you know you´re fast AND you know you´re right on the limit of the machine when it begin to whobble and bend like a wild horse. You know "ok, that´s the point i don´t have to go too far off otherwise i will get hurt..."
KR: "It doesn´t bend and whobble as she stuff that i rode"
Means that you can´t feel the limit on the modern bikes as it was possible in the old ones.
This is caused by missive stiffer frames, massive improvements in tyre technology and also in suspension improvements.
In the past the frames were weak and flexible, the whole motorcycle bend under hard acceleration.... modern frames are developed in another way....they should bend a little in some directions and have to be stiff in other directions. That´s the difficult point at which Ducati struggled....due to modern technology you can build a frame that is stiff as stiff can be BUT the rider is not able to feel the limit anymore.
And you have to ride on the limit as much as you can to be the one on the top of the podium.
KR: "we were look out of control when we fell off....these guys don´t look out of control and they fell off"
as described above...due to the modern electronics, modern frames, supensions , tires, etc you can ride much faster today than in the past and the limit is pushed way ahead BUT the area of the limit is small and sharp as a razor´s edge....a little too much and will be thrown into the air...a little to less and you will be 5/100sec slower per lap to get onto the podium 

Regarding to the Subject of this thread:
My personal opinion: Yes, the modern MotoGP is better than the 70/80´s because of the show and the bikes 
Especially the last race in Valencia...the 1st 5-6 laps was nice to see....and hopefully the show will be better in 2014 when the middle of the pack will be closer together....no more CRT 
Compared to the 90´s i would say that nothing comes close to the seasons 1995-2000. That was the best Motorcyclce racing ever 

[Hawk]

Well guys..... Personally I think that all this technology that has crept into motorcycle racing over the past two decades has to a great degree ruined motorcycle racing in the sense that the bikes are easier to ride than the old 500cc GP machines and therefore your not seeing a true representation of a riders talent and ability; In fact I will go as far as to say, and I say this with all due respect to the modern MotoGP riders because it's not their fault that the technology has taken MotoGP down this road(and this is a really controversial statement), but you can say from a certain point of view that the teams are in fact cheating the fans of seeing motorcycle racing at it's true best.

In Roberts and Sheens era, they had to totally use their ability of feel and judgment and, especially control of the throttle and brakes, etc, to get the best performance out of the machines. Nowadays the riders have TC, engine maps, computers controlling the braking, and anti wheelie control units, even now the riders have air bags systems built into their leathers, LOL... I mean c'mon!! How much easier are they going to make it for these guys today!  This in my mind totally destroys any thought that winning is down to a riders true talent and ability; of course you still have to have talent and ability in this modern era to win GP's, but I ask you this: "Are these modern MotoGP riders really truly and honestly tested like they were in the good old days??". I personally think not by a long, long way .

I say cut out all the riding aids and let's see how todays riders truly face up to the machines they are riding today. Then you would see the true talents sort the men out from the boys.

[HornetMaX]

I say cut out all the riding aids and let's see how todays riders truly face up to the machines they are riding today.

Don't know ... motor sports have always been a test bench for research and innovation. You simply can't ask to go back to the era of "2t, no electronics, no carbon" just because it was (supposedly) more funny to watch/ride.

If a championship sole goal was to see who's the best rider, they should all compete with identical bikes (over time, to allow comparison of riders of different periods). But that's not the case.

And this season has been pretty interesting: I can't see how we could call this a "ruined sport".

I tend to think that some of us have a "romantic" approach (the famous "it was better before"). Not long ago I had a similar discussion with another GPB player on electric motorbikes: I let you guess my position

MaX.

[Superballs]

I find spec races to be really boring, which is why in auto racing I prefer LeMans to F1.

Thing is, with all things being equal when it comes to the vehicle, the better driver will win, and that's the only factor.

With all things being equal in driver ability, assuming no mistakes being made, the better vehicle will win.

Given that mistakes will be made by even the best drivers, having differences in the vehicles will just add another dynamic.

Racing is about different teams...TEAMS and manufacturers and drivers all competing.  Each manufacturer wants to build a better machine, each driver wants to be better than the other drivers and be comfortable with their machine and each team wants to have the best combination of driver/machine.

Most of the technology today is available to all teams, barring specific manufacturer innovation (Kawasaki has feature X while Honda has feature Y while Ducati has feature Z etc.).  This creates the same mix up, but it does seem that it's a lot like the olympics.  As technology and technique get more and more refined, the gap between racers is likely going to close, barring driver error.

[HornetMaX]

As technology and technique get more and more refined, the gap between racers is likely going to close, barring driver error.

That explains why Rossi was so "close" to Lorenzo last year ...

Single vehicle categories are good only as lower categories: when there's money at stake, constructors want to fight for supremacy.
For example: if MotoGp was Honda only, same bike for everybody, what would be the interest for Honda ?! Zero (or close to).

MaX.

[Alby46]

that's what happened in moto2, they only use honda engines

[janaucarre]

I heared a moto2 rider(scott redding) last year, he was talking about his laps on a 500cc at SPA: We need to have this bikes on modern championship for better entertainment/playing(don't know the exact term, amusement in french). Before, the pilot makes 80% of the work for a good lap, now he makes only 20%, before, the power was only on 2000 or 3000 rpm, now they can play with 10000 or 12000rpm.
I think it's like all new vehicles, all are assisted.

[Hawk]

We just need to get back to the talents of a man riding a bike not the bike riding the man, if you know what I mean?

I'm sure all of us would have a lot greater respect and awe for these MotoGP guys of today(like there was in the old days) if we knew that it was they who directly control the throttle(Power), it was they who control the rear wheel slides and it way they who controlled the brakes(no brake balance or anti-lock) of their bikes. All these aids have just gone way too far in my opinion. They should ban all riding aids altogether then we'd see some real talent coming through.
I'd love to see the modern riders against the likes of Roberts, Sheene, Spencer, Lucchinelli, and Uncini.... It's a shame people like that have to get old and can't carry on entertaining us all through out the decades.

Just thought I'd throw a dash of controversy into this discussion guys. Hehe. 

[HornetMaX]

that's what happened in moto2, they only use honda engines

Exactly, and in Moto2 it makes a lot of sense. But it does not for the top category.

before, the power was only on 2000 or 3000 rpm, now they can play with 10000 or 12000rpm.

And this is bad ?! Even putting aside the fact races (in top categories, like motogp and f1) also serve the purpose of research and development of solutions that in the future will come to commercial bikes, a bike with same power but on a wider power band is simply a better bike. Can't go back just because it is "funnier" to ride a 500. Along these lines, riding a unicycle may be even funnier than riding a motorbike but ...

I'm sure all of us would have a lot greater respect and awe for these MotoGP guys of today(like there was in the old days) if we knew that it was they who directly control the throttle(Power), it was they who control the rear wheel slides and it way they who controlled the brakes(no brake balance or anti-lock) of their bikes. All these aids have just gone way too far in my opinion. They should ban all riding aids altogether then we'd see some real talent coming through.

Personally I think that's wrong. Today's bike have more power, have higher top speeds and can accelerate harder. Brakes are likely to be stronger too.
I think today's rider are neither better nor worse than yesterdays's ones. Even on today's bikes, the rider makes the differnce (ask Rossi or Pedrosa in MotoGP, Massa or Webber in F1).

The only thing I can concede is that yesterday's riders were braver: 500cc bikes were a lot more dangerous (I mean when bringing them to the limit).
But even this, is it fully true ? I mean, 500cc didn't reach 340+ Kmh ...

Kevin Cameron discusses exactly this point in his book "Sportbike Performance Handbook" (2008 ,chapter 11, "The Electronic Motorcycle"): you can read it here (page 95-96, just the paragraph "Lessons from MotoGP"): Sportbike Performance Handbook

I agree with him 100%. If you set the threshold at the 500cc era, older riders supporters will come up and say things like: "Wait, before these guys we've been riding without tubeless tires or aluminium chassis, we were the real men !".

That debate pops up in every sport and in motor sports in particular. But in 20 years, people will be discussing if 2035 riders are better or worse than Rossi, Stoner and Marquez ... the watershed seems always to be as far as the memory of one person goes.

MaX.