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... ;D
"Modern MotoGP bikes are easier to ride than the great 500cc GP bikes of the heyday years of motorcycle racing". :P ;D
Listen to someone who really nows the deal: http://youtu.be/D79UuvNlxFA (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! 8) ;D
i'm 16... but i already knew this! :D
Quote from: Alby46 on November 09, 2013, 05:08:39 PM
i'm 16... but i already knew this! :D
Nice one, mate! I thought I might be on my own with this one... You know your stuff, Alby.. Welcome aboard! 8) ;D
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.
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 09, 2013, 10:02:34 PM
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?
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 ...
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. :D
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 :D
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 8)
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 :P.
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. ;D :P 8)
Quote from: Hawk_UK on November 11, 2013, 09:45:50 AM
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.
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.
Quote from: Superballs on March 05, 2014, 04:19:58 PM
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.
that's what happened in moto2, they only use honda engines
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.
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. ;) ;D
Quote from: Alby46 on March 05, 2014, 04:48:38 PM
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.
Quote from: janaucarre on March 05, 2014, 05:31:53 PM
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 ...
Quote from: Hawk_UK on March 05, 2014, 05:54:17 PM
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 (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=J7tQp2LtsYIC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false)
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.
Having been a young gun at the end of "Steady Eddie" Lawson's career as a rider, watching the greatest of the greats retire, and lusting after bikes such as the RGV500, NSR500, and Cagiva's, I am proud to state that era is gone, the new MotoGP is a different breed and a different era, not much to compare. My personal opinion of current motorcycle racing is about equal to my opinion of F1 racing. 500's and the F1 Turbo era are the cream of the crop for me, the best of the best, the fastest of the fast. Back when men were men and the boys stayed home and played with the idea of racing a motorcycle.
The greatest riders of all time lived in the 500GP era, NOT to say that current riders are not as talented, they probably are more talented, but the sheer courage it took to ride a 500GP machine is so far removed from current motorcycle racing. I guarantee you put Rossi on Lawsons old Cagiva and he would come back totally disgusted with the way it behaves.
This is the 3rd of three parts, skip to 5:15 for the take on a 500 world champ telling a current MotoGP rider what it's about. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Vw_xRy-u-g
It was a common occurrence for a newcomer to 500's to take some practice laps, mark a horrible time, and nearly hang up their leathers because they felt that the bike was far beyond anything they could control or handle. Lawson himself as well as Roberts both often lament on the fact they struggled at great lengths to adapt to the incredible behavior of the 500's.
Kenny's take on 500 versus current MotoGP was that the 500's had a limit you could find with enough skill, current MotoGP has a limit you ride and if you are off the pace it is still manageable, you just are not as fast as the next man. If you can ride the edge of a current GP machine you are world class, if you could win on a 500 you had a true gift as a rider. Simple statements from a man who has a few lifetimes worth of experience.
Current MotoGP, to me, just like current F1, looks like spec racing. Battles are won by milliseconds and setup rather than true grit and endurance as a rider hammering out the limit corner after corner. Honestly the current breed of GP machines is getting BACK to the 500 era's attitude and demeanor with the added flavor of technological development. Racing has become safer, but with that safety comes what feels and looks so watered down I only care to see the highlight reels at the end of a race rather than the actual lap after lap grinding they do. What happened to the massive wobbles? The wheelies? The tire smoking power slides? Without that life and death lightswitch at the limit there is no real reason to watch racing for me, better off watching Irish Road Racing to get my kicks. ::)
Quote from: grimm on March 05, 2014, 11:05:06 PM
What happened to the massive wobbles? The wheelies? The tire smoking power slides?
They all disappeared, because they make you slower.
But as already said, I'm OK to say that racing at the time required more courage.
Notice however that when Ben says he'd like to ride a 500 ("all the power and no electronics") Eddie says "you wouldn't like to ride a 500" adding "because tires were crap, suspensions were crap".
This should tell you two things:
- Most blame everything on electronics, but there are plenty of other reasons, just as important.
- Today's bikes are better bikes, even according to Eddie :)
MaX.
@grimm: Nice video to explain what we're debating here from a former great 500cc champ, the night and day comparisons of riding MotoGP today than in 500cc GP of yesteryears, and I absolutely agree with everything you said above...... Beautifully said mate ;) ;D
@Max: Yes, I agree in that your saying that todays bikes are far better, I wholeheartedly agree, but what makes them better is what is making them dull to watch compared to the GP 500 era; the sheer excitement of watching todays MotoGP's is not the same. But the knowledge that the 500cc GP bikes took an incredible amount of skill to ride and win GP's compared to todays MotoGP bikes means that the inevitable comparisons were bound to raise their heads in the very same sense as it has in modern F1 compared to years ago.
Don't get me wrong guys.... I'm certainly not saying that I don't like modern MotoGP, in fact I love it! All I'm saying is that it is just missing that special something in riders, personalities and bikes that the great years of 500cc GP racing certainly had in bucket loads. Maybe it's become far too professional? I don't know, but something is certainly missing.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on March 06, 2014, 12:31:12 AM
@Max: Yes, I agree in that your saying that todays bikes are far better, I wholeheartedly agree, but what makes them better is what is making them dull to watch compared to the GP 500 era; the sheer excitement of watching todays MotoGP's is not the same. But the knowledge that the 500cc GP bikes took an incredible amount of skill to ride and win GP's compared to todays MotoGP bikes means that the inevitable comparisons were bound to raise their heads in the very same sense as it has in modern F1 compared to years ago.
Last season wasn't exactly dull in my opinion.
The problem of F1 is different: they just can't overtake any longer. No overtake, no fun. They know it and they try to do something about it (KERS, DRS). Not sure they are succeeding though.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on March 06, 2014, 12:31:12 AM
Maybe it's become far too professional? I don't know, but something is certainly missing.
That's surely part of it. Usually the ones that say "500cc were a better show than MotoGP" have what I call a
romantic vision of the sport: they like the though man, jumping on his unrideable bike (eventually after smoking some illegal substance just before the start, there are videos to prove that, no kidding), taking the triple of the risks of the second best, risking his life every weekend and ending his career with more broken bones than untouched ones. That's the 'cowboy' approach.
Also, they tend to admire more the human "performance" than the technical performance (the rider more than the bike): this is a totally respectable point of view, but if you really want this you have to have same bike for everybody and do a pure riders championship (instead of the usual "riders + constructors").
The problem with all that is that it is not economically sustainable. And if it's not sustainable, it's gonna die. Which, bottom line, is bad.
Overall I'm not in favor of unlimited electronic assist (or whichever technological development). For example, I'm pretty much against launch control and any form of "automatic" control that uses the GPS position of the bike (i.e. the bike knows the track and change engine/suspension parameters depending on where it is on the track). I barely tolerate anti-wheeling, but only because it's something useful on street bikes (but as it is not extra-hard to make one, I'd prefer if there was none on motogp bikes). Traction control is however very necessary with todays powers and very important for street bikes.
But things have to move forward, otherwise it lacks interest.
MaX.
I used to absolutely love watching the 500cc races because you could see how difficult they where to ride. Constantly trying to throw the riders into orbit.
Then they started using the 4 stroke bikes. And it was spectacular to watch them slider the rear around like mad men in the first few seasons before they really started using electronic aids.
After that I started to loose interest the racing became kinda dull to watch.
Then they introduced moto2 and woohoo! Some of the old wildness and craziness was back from what I used to love to see.
The last few seasons of moto2 has been such good fun to watch. I look forward to seeing the young guys in moto2 race a lot more than I do the motogp class.
@Max: There is probably some romantic vision of the past, as there always is when you look back, but in this case I would have to say it is very small a romantic vision. Progress for progress sake is not always a good thing for a sport(Golf is a good example of the governing body banning so many so called advances in club technology to save the essence of what golf is all about, and the sport has continued to thrive because of their protection.), and in my opinion the very real progress in bike technology in MotoGP has ruined the very essence of what used to be called the blue ribbon event of road racing which was the "World Motorcycle 500cc GP championships"; it was the very pinnacle of motorcycle road racing until they decided to change to the four stroke machines. I mean, the MotoGP championships is no more interesting these days than watching the Super Bike Champs, or even club racing(well that's probably going too far there. LOL)
But basically what I'm saying is that MotoGP has lost it's "Mojo" from what it used to be.
Huff! They even stopped push starts for christ sakes.... I mean what was that all about? Some twisted sense of safety creeping into racing? Lets wrap them all up in cotton wool, eh?! But then again, can you imagine poor little Danny Pedrosa trying to push start that Honda of his? Hehehe! ;D
@Hawk: notice that romantic did not have any negative sense in my intentions, it was just a way to describe the point of view.
The golf comparison is interesting, but there's one major difference: golf is a golfers only championship, not a golf + club maker (or balls maker, or gloves maker) championship. You said that they took measures to protect it, but they did not take the one and single measure that would have ensured perfect competition: same clubs for all the players. Why they didn't is obvious.
And, to be honest, research and innovation in golf clubs is not really useful (mind, it could be technically interesting). Same for the UK-loved curling :)
MotoGP is supposed to be the technological top (just as F1 for cars): you can't limit technology too much (like in Nascar) otherwise other series will fill the gap.
If MotoGP becomes too restricted, SBK will become less and constructors will go to SBK for technology showdown.
The debate is endless, but we all know what will happen: progress will come and old dogs like you and me will discuss if it was or not better before :) :)
Anyway, what else do we have to do ? It rains 110% of the time in this bloody country of yours (and mine, at least for a few extra months) !!
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on March 05, 2014, 11:18:07 PM
Quote from: grimm on March 05, 2014, 11:05:06 PM
What happened to the massive wobbles? The wheelies? The tire smoking power slides?
They all disappeared, because they make you slower.
*snipped out a bit of the reply there*
MaX.
Indeed they can make you slower, but the point I was making is that the current limit doesn't look like the limit until there is a shower of sparks, same thing Kenny was stating in the original video. I guarantee the front and rear end slides of a current MotoGP machine feel far more under control, but it is the same slides that the old 500's had as well, physically bikes haven't changed much at all since the days of the 500's, sure you can account for carbon fiber and titanium being massive effects on how rideable the machines are, but in a sense of pure performance they run at a parallel.
My point of my reply to begin with, and ended with it as well, stated that there really isn't much to compare aside from how interesting it is to watch.
My unprofessional, unsolicited, and unprovoked opinion shining through in the next bit of this, so take it with a grain of salt. No need to poke this part full of holes although some will strongly disagree I'm sure. lol
I'm a die hard vintage bike guy, KZ1000's, CB T's and F's, GS's, the lot of 'em I've owned and flogged pretty hard. My interest in Honda CBR900RR's is solely based on the 893cc models with 16" front wheel dating to the era of the amazing (and last iteration before the 4 stroke revolution) NSR500, and my love for everything Suzuki air/oil 1127 and 1157 is surrounded by the feedback from the bike. When you ride a 900RR or a GSXR1100 to the limit it "speaks to you" in a way that a '05 CBR1000RR or a '07 GSXR1000 just can't. Tire technology is far from what is solely to blame as well.
Swingarms got longer as engine cases shrunk and transmissions were stacked vertically, engines shoved as close to the front axle as possible, and seating positions forcing you into the race tuck regardless of your skill levels on a sport bike (or more aptly known when I began my infatuation with riding, a "race replica"), for the kiddo's reading this, that is where all your funky pirate sounding bike names comes from, CBR----"RR" as in, "Race Replica" ;)). Always laughed at the sight of a bike with a bazillion R's in the name as if to say to the unknowing, "this thing is serious". LOL
I know I am drifting a bit off topic here, but bear with me, and keep in mind, the ones of us who watched the technological evolution of motorcycle racing don't prefer to watch 500's because they were "better" by any measure, or even faster, but it was the courageous riders that picked up a wheelie at the end of a corner and didn't set it down until the braking zone of the next that made us stand up from our seats and cheer them on. Mr. Roberts himself has said time and again in interviews he caught hell for his behavior on (and at times off) the track due to his enjoyment of everything hooligan on two wheels. For bloody sake the man rode a TZ flat tracker to a stunning victory on a few occasions when Harley owned the dirt miles for years prior... I agree with him when he said "MotoGP is far removed from what the 500 era was.". But I have to say it's not
that different at all, only us older guys feel so. :)
Quote from: grimm on March 06, 2014, 11:12:03 AM
I guarantee the front and rear end slides of a current MotoGP machine feel far more under control, but it is the same slides that the old 500's had as well
Right, this seems to be another common pattern. No longer than a few months back, on another forum a user criticized MotoGP saying "where are the rear wheels sliding out of a corner like in the 500 era ?". It didn't took long to another user (not me) to post him a shitload of MotoGP super slo-mo replays (from youtube) showing today's guys are sliding as hell. And not only out of a corner, but also getting in the corner and well in the middle of it. But somehow, the 500 fans don't see that ... kind of selective sliding eye sensitivity ;)
I do admire the courage of past riders (and F1 drivers, and rally drivers), but courage can't be the #1 motivation, otherwise we'd be all watching the youtube videos of that russian guy doing single arm pull-ups from the top of a crane with 200m of void below him (and no safety net). Wait, ... we're all watching that, ain't we ? :)
Now if we want funnier races, I'm all in favor of that: just don't ask to go back to a crazy era. It won't happen anyway.
MaX.
@Max: I don't know who that guy was who was talking about were the rear wheel slides are today like with the old 500cc GP bikes, but in my opinion he has got it very wrong. Modern MotoGP riders spin that rear wheel up all the time, it's standard practice nowadays.
In the old days of 500cc GP bikes(and I'm talking about the 1970's - mid 80's) only a very few talented guys could slide the rear wheel like they do today. I think it was Freddie Spencer who really started it all off in that era with his incredible throttle control for the bikes of those days, and it became increasingly more so when the 500cc bikes started to get their big bang engines which I heard it reported that those engines upped the BHP from around 130bhp to 180-190BHP(Is this true?). In those days it took very real throttle control with that very narrow power band on the 2 stroke bikes. Today every rider is doing it; don't know if it's because of all that extra power at their wrist, or whether it's down to being able to set traction control to allow for some rear wheel slide but not enough to over do it? I believe it gives a modern MotoGP rider a greater range for errors before the bike will chew you up and spit you out, is that correct? I've never used traction control so I wouldn't really know. :)
Geometry of the bikes has relaxed a great deal allowing for not only a far easier to ride bike, but allowing the wheel slip to be regulated alot better as well. Tire technology makes up for the "relaxed" geometry numbers and there by reduces head shakes and rear end slides to what is given as a rider input rather than just a character of the bike's behavior.
Early 500GP (a rather accurate scale model, but none the less a good example):
(http://www.tamiyausa.com/images/product/180/14121/gallery_14121_02.jpg)
Late era 500GP (you can see the clear difference in suspension design, not much else changes all that drastically though):
(http://imageshack.us/a/img843/4263/ddee.jpg)
Current era MotoGP (Vastly longer in the suspension department, shorter frame and engine distance between the wheels, the list goes on and on with the ways the engineers centralized the mass of the bike, a Honda trade term was coined by this sort of development, and with it came an ability to expirement with smaller diameter tires, different levels of suspension travel, swingarm pivot location could be changed for a far more drastic effect with a longer swingarm, fork rake and trail could be completely modified to suit tire compound and track surface in a way the 500's could only dream of in the late 80's and early 90's):
(http://speedzilla.com/forums/attachments/honda-rc51/6463-rc211v-triple-exhaust-v5.jpg?stc=1)
That was exactly one of my points: electronics surely contribute to the difference between today and the 500 period, but it's only one of the differences.
Like Eddie (lol, sounds like I know him) said in the video, tires are very different, suspensions are very different. I'd personally also add that chassis are very different too: due to progress in technology (materials, processes etc) and in understanding of bike dynamic behavior (through simulation and theory).
If we were to build a 500cc bike today (under the rules of that period), I'm not sure it would be very very similar to the 500cc bikes at the time. It was a long time ago ...
Today it would probably be possible to intentionally give these MotoGP bikes a very narrow power band 9thanks to ... uh, electronics) similar to the one of a 500: but why in hell one would want to do that ? Because it is more "spectacular" ? Not sure anybody can defend that argument ...
MaX.
I think I am seeing a common theme here, the GP Bikes community is small because we are very like minded. Can be a good thing and can surely cause some pretty strong arguments as well, but one thing is for sure, we are loyal to our cause of top end motorcycle technology and control. 8)
my idea is that the riders, whether of the past or the modern era, are and have been brave and spectacular in different ways, we just can't find a reason why today's riders are spectacular.