Talk:Grand Prix motorcycle racing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Grand Prix motorcycle racing is within the scope of the Motorcycling WikiProject, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of motorcycles and motorcycling. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This article is within the scope of the Grand Prix motorcycle racing WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of motorcycle racing. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Contents 1 Google results 2 Flag-to-flag racing 3 Top Speeds 4 MotoGP 5 800cc 6 Specifications 7 Low/highside 8 World Championship Grand Prix motorcycle racing 9 MotoGP class 10 Off course

[edit] Google results

I don't have a suggestion, but I wanted to point out that when searching "motogp" in Google, this wikipedia article is number 43 in the list of results. I understand all the logical reasons to call this article "Grand Prix motorcycle racing", but for practical purposes the article is invisible to anyone looking for MotoGP information using Google.--Uli Kunkel 19:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

It's up to 8th place now. Not sure what changed (maybe Google?), but it's pretty acceptable.--Uli Kunkel 21:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Flag-to-flag racing

This system is detailed twice.

I deleted the repetition in the "Specifications" section, since that area seemed to focus more on the machines than on race rules.--207.62.67.122 18:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Top Speeds

From the article - " Current top speeds are approaching 350 km/h, which exceeds that of Formula One car racing."

Folks, it makes only sense to compare speeds a the same track only! Sometimes, the F1 and MotoGP of a country are held on different track, e.g. in Germany. Regarding top speeds, Circuit Catalunya might be a good indicator. --Matthead 18:24, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

What is the source for this, at the 2004 Italian F1 Grand Prix the top speed recorded in the speed traps was Pizzonia with 369KM/H. --202.1.119.192 16:24, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Good point. I didn't stop to check the accuracy of the statement when I was cleaning up the wording. I found a reference to Loris Capirossi setting a MotoGP speed record in 2003 at Mugello, 332.4 km/h (206.5 mph). Oddly enough, I couldn't find any reference to this at the MotoGP site, but of course it appears at the Ducati site, as well as numerous motorcycle racing news sites. I also found an Allianz press release about Antonio Pizzonia of the BMW WilliamsF1 team reaching 369.9 km/h (229.8 mph) in 2004 at Monza.

I'll adjust that part of the article to compare the current top speeds. Please correct the records if and when they are broken. :) --DrunkenMonkey 23:29, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Im not sure if 269km/h is the fastest F1 speed in history, i was just pointing out an emample of F1 having higher top speeds. That said i reckon MotoGP probobly had faster top speeds than F1 at the Shanghai circuit, as MotoGP cars do not have the drag that F1 cars get due to their massive downfoce. The reason F1 is so fast at Monza is that F1 cars run a low downforce setup there to maximise top speed. F1 cars would of course be massivly faster around the corners at Shanghai compared to Motogp. --202.1.119.192 15:00, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

The Allianz article states that "Pizzonia beat the former record set by world champion Michael Schumacher in the Italian Grand Prix 2003." I was unable to locate speed records at the F1 site. Downforce tuning is certainly important, but the long straights at Monza may have more influence on allowing the machines to reach higher speeds. World Superbike ace Troy Corser wrote, "I knew Monza was going to be tough, virtually anyone can go fast there. It is all about horsepower at this circuit and as a rider all you have to do is basically sit on the bike an [sic] turn the throttle!" Mugello, where Capirossi set the current MotoGP speed record, also has a long straight, more than a kilometer in length. --DrunkenMonkey 02:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

That is probably based on the fact that during the 2004 IRTA test Capirossi recorded 347.4 km/h (with strong wind assistance). In the same year, at the same track (MGP doesn't race at Monza, the fastest F1 circuit) F1s were a fraction slower. So the statement is true, but a bit misleading. 213.28.235.4 06:37, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Only speeds measured in races count as official records. Also, if there is going to be any comparison with F1, talking of top speeds is only part of the story. If you compare lap times on the same circuits, the F1 lap times are sometimes more than 25% faster than the MotoGP times. Compare Malaysia, Suzuka, Catalunya, etc.

Fastest laps from the 2005 races at two tracks that MotoGP and F1 share: Malaysia: 1'35.483 Raikkonen 2'02.993 Hayden Catalunya: 1'15.641 Fisichella 1'43.195 Rossi Top speeds might be comparable, but in braking and cornering downforce+fat tires gives the cars a huge advantage.

[edit] MotoGP

Maveric, the p in "Grand Prix" is always capitalized. Perhaps this should be titled "Grand Prix motorcycle racing" (or "MotoGP", the title the organisers use). --Robert Merkel

Not MotoGP, that is the new name for the fastest class of Grand Prix motorcycle racing (which I think is the appropriate name). The official name appears to be Road Racing Grand Prix, but that is not a good name for the article, since it excludes the motorcycle part. jheijmans

Have to disagree with you here Robert -- "grand prix" in this context has slipped into general usage. I always Goggle a term before determining the correct capitalization of articles. Check this out. If the number one linked and page ranked site on Google along with several others on the same first search result page uses the term in lowercase, then I think we can't claim that the the 'p' is always capitalized. The corresponding wikipedia naming convention to follow here is to use lowercase if the term is not always capitalized in English. BTW, I don't go out of my way to find lowercased examples of terms since improper usage is easy to find on even Google after the first two or three pages of search results. There should be an article about the race itself, but I'm not sure what to call it either. Capitalization of that "Grand Prix" may be warrented, but only a proper search and determine this (of course if you use the official and proper name of the race itself then it should be capitalized). Cheers! --maveric149

Maveric, on the google search you link, I don't see a lowercase p in the first hit. But, I think Grand Prix definitely should be in caps, no matter the usual policy. You may also find "Olympic games" (with lowercase g), but the page here isn't named like that. Both words are names and should be capitalised. jheijmans

The issue here is proper names - everything in wikipedia has a name but everything is wikipedia is not capitalized. If Grand Prix is a particular brand of motorcycle or if it is a very specific term that in other contexts is always capitalized (which when by itself it almost always is) and that term applies to a very specific class of bikes then capitalization may be warrented. With that said, this particular case really isn't that important because redirects now exists to cover several different capitalization and pluralization variants. Capitalization wasn't he major issue with the old name of the article BTW -- it was pluralization. How about a compromise of Grand Prix motorcycle? I wouldn't object to that due to the fact that Grand Prix (when expressed as a single term) is supposed to be capitalized. --maveric149

Grand Prix is not a type of motorcycle, but a type of contest in sports. You may also find it in automobile racing, but also in other sports the term is used. The (originally French) term is considered a proper name, yes. I see that the issue was about change the plural to singular, but Robert Merkel's proposal was to change the article's name to what it is about: the racing rather than the kind of motorcycles used. jheijmans

Interesting. How about Grand Prix motorcycle racing or if the capitalization of the "P" really isn't needed or is a general word (capitalization of the roots of anglicized terms isn't really valid -- otherwise all anglicized German nouns would be capitalized) then grand prix motorcycle racing (which is lowercased enough to technically rationalize this -- although there are several common capitalization variants besides these two. But I would recommend only the ones above). --maveric149

Maveric, I bit the bullet and shifted to Grand Prix motorcycle racing, seeing most people were happy with that. --Robert Merkel

Hey guys I'm super interested in MotoGP and will do my best to add and format content on MotoGP related pages. So far my small edits have been to add short but important details about recent season changes to the pages. --Nutschig 08:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

here is my opinion on the following sentence "this shift to 800 cc four-stroke engines also created a controversy as the 1000 cc Superbike racing circuit will extremely likely be the fastest motorcycle racing circuit in the world now"

At the current time, here is the situation : Superbikes are not as fast as the motocycles in the motoGP category and that can be seen by comparing all time reports for the circuits (Brno, phillip Island, Valencia, Losail, Assen) The difference in performance is significant and that's simply because motoGP bikes are full-fledged prototypes, and superbikes are not. Even with the shift to 800 cc, motoGP bikes will likely lose speed but that will be 1 second-2 seconds per lap according to the circuits, and therefore if we try to compare, Superbikes will not be able to out-perform them.

[edit] 800cc

I'd like to see links or citations to the claims made in this paragraph: "The specific choice of a reduction to 800 cc (as opposed to other power reduction methods, such as decreasing the number of transmission gears permitted) is very favourable to Honda, who currently run a five cylinder machine, and need only remove a cylinder to modify their engine. Other manufacturers will need to entirely redesign their engines. Cynical journalists have suggested that this power reduction decision came about due to pressure from Honda, but there is no public evidence to support this claim."

I'm not an engineer, but I find it hard to imagine that the switch to 800cc will be as simple as removing a cylinder; also, the last sentence is a bit like asking "When did you stop beating your wife?" The whole paragraph smacks of Hondaphobia. --Uli Kunkel 05:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey there Uli, I was the one who threw in that paragraph at the last second, I'll add this link to the main page: http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=207419&FS= . "With the 2007 MotoGP regulations reducing maximum engine capacity from 990 to 800 cc, the balance of power in MotoGP may shift in favor of Honda, which is rumored to be able to develop a new engine by simply lopping off one of the current powerplant's five cylinders."

I work as a computer engineer with my university's Society of Automotive Engineer's Formula 3 car: from a mechanical engineering point of view, lopping off a fifth cylinder is a very easy way to design an engine. The valves, timing, and shapes of the cylinders don't have to have any change, as well as the volume of the cylinders. All other teams must completely redesign their engines, from the size and shape of their pistons to their valves and timing. --Nutschig 01:50, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I am a mechanical engineer. This statement is actually fairly incorrect for many reasons, I would guess that the journalist who made that claim has no familiarity with internal combustion engine design whatsoever. If no one objects, I would like to remove this paragraph. If anyone is interested, I will gladly provide all the reasons why removing a cylinder from the engine configuration would not be an effective method of complying with the new rules.Doctorscholz 22:10, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, edit finished, and I combined the two different sections on the 800cc rule change under the Specifications header. Any ideas? --Nutschig 02:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Nutschig: my compliments on the neatness of the changes; however, the source article has no author and refers to a "rumor". Also, lopping off a cylinder would result in 8ccs less than the limit, an insignificant difference in a cake recipe, but probably unacceptable in a sport that depends on hundreths of a second. I've also seen rumors that Honda's 800cc bike will be a V3, not a V4.

I think the intro page is getting too heavy with techincal minutae; it would probably frustrate any new fans of the sport.--Uli Kunkel 03:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I made some changes to try to make the intro and overview sections more readable.--Uli Kunkel 04:42, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me, guess we'll have to put some of the 990cc to 500 cc differences in some section about the history of MotoGP. I'll think about it. --Nutschig 05:01, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks; speaking of history, I'm working on a pretty extensive account of the Golden Era of GP: 1988 to 1993, season-by-season. It should be up by February.

Now that I've put the material together, it strikes me as inappropriate for an encylopedia-type site. Compliments to the guys that created the pages to the list Riders and Champions.Uli Kunkel 22:59, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Honda has unveiled their 800, and the capacity is 800cc, not the 792cc you'd expect if they simply lopped off a cylinder. The referenced article at motorsport.com is an anonymous rumor, and if Doctorsholz would be so kind, I *would* like to see a detailed description as to why going to 800 isn't as easy as lopping off a cylinder. In the meantime, the paragraph goes.Uli Kunkel 18:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Specifications

I have rearranged the Specifications spection, and added some more detail. I have also created a 'Challenges for the Designer' section, which includes some interesting details and commentary not directly related to Spec's - Rgds, --Trident13 22:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Low/highside

Why is any of this text...

Motorcycle crashes are usually of two types: lowsides and highsides. A lowside is when the motorcycle falls onto the side closest to the ground mostly caused by the the front tyre losing grip, usually from cornering too sharply or using too much front brake; a highside is when a motorcycle flips in the opposite direction of the turn. Highsides occur from the back tyre losing grip, starting to spin and slide and finally achieving grip which, in most cases, propels the rider from the seat.

...important to this article? I suggest we remove it. Might even make sense to start an article called something like "motorcycle crashes" and explain different kinds of crashes. Thoughts? Roguegeek 16:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I inserted that text because I'd like the MotoGP article to be useful to people who are new to motorcycle racing, instead of assuming everyone has been watching for a while.--Uli Kunkel 18:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. It feels like it could be another article entirely, though. It's not like the Grand Prix article talks about what a motorcycle is. It assumes you know and if you want more knowledge on what a motorcycle is, they'll click on the wikilink to motorcycle. I still like the idea of making it a separate article all together. Thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 19:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, you convinced me, especially since crashes apply to more than one type of road motorcycle racing. Not that I'm going to be the one to write the moto crash article, though.--Uli Kunkel 02:16, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Brianhe made a pair of nice separate articles for lowsides and highsides, and since I added the original text, I guess I'll go ahead and remove it to streamline the article.Uli Kunkel 21:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] World Championship Grand Prix motorcycle racing

There were Grand Prix before there was a World Championship Grand Prix, and they are not even mentioned, so, is the page title appropriate?Seasalt 12:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MotoGP class

The following text is premature:

The hope that this reduced engine size would reduce MotoGP speed was proved without merit during initial tests of the 800 cc machines at Valencia in late 2006, when the new machines lapped within a fraction of a second of the speeds attained during the last 990 cc MotoGP two weeks earlier.

Testing lap times are close for the 800s and 990s, but there haven't yet been any real top speeds posted. If the 800s are substantially slower in the straights but faster in the turns, that would make them safer because lack of run-off space at the end of a straight is what killed Katoh and had maximum speeds been allowed to continue creeping up, expensive track redesigns would have been necessary. The move to 800cc could buy track managers a few more years before having to make the changes.--Uli Kunkel 19:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Off course

Two things. First, does anybody have a list of venues they could include? I'd be interested, & I'm sure others would be, too. Second, can somebody clarify something I've heard? Namely, the last 500cc event was at the Piquet circuit in '01. The article doesn't support that... Trekphiler 11:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Orsoni has added a bunch of pages for season reviews (see bottom of the main page), but there's a gap from '99 to '04; the season review pages have a list of rounds/tracks. Your second question can be answered by going to motogp.com and looking at the results for 2001 (yes, it was at Piquet); I think the main GP wikipedia page would be too cumbersome if it had to include such specific information.--Uli Kunkel 23:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

2001 season review page added.--Uli Kunkel 16:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)