The ultimate two and four-wheel race machines on the same track – which would you have? We’ve attempted to compare the performance of the two on the few circuits that they have in common. Here are the results…
Imagine seeing, on the starting line, Sebastian Vettel (or Hamilton, or Alonso, it doesn’t matter) and Jorge Lorenzo (or Pedrosa, or Valentino Rossi) with their own race machines side-by-side. Ready, set, go! Who would cross the finish line first after one lap?
It’s one of the many impossible hypothetical challenges that has tormented sports fans around the world. Impossible because, at the highest levels, there are only a few tracks in the world that the two categories have in common. In fact, the only real one is Sepang in Malaysia, because in Barcelona where Formula 1 holds the Spanish GP, at Catalunya, the F1 cars use an extra chicane, which the bikes are exempt from. But let’s entertain ourselves all the same, and try to envision the duel with the help of some numbers – and with the help of an expert.
If we were to only consider peak speed, then F1 would clearly be left behind. At Sepang, the top speed for F1 cars on the front straight just surpasses 300km/h – while Lorenzo on his Yamaha reaches 320km/h at the same spot. In Spain, F1 cars reach between 310 and 320km/h, while, on his bike, Stoner has touched 334km/h. These numbers are hardly impressive, given the enormous rolling resistance (due to the dimensions of the tires, along with the wing effect) that is inherent in the cars. But how do they compare in terms of lap time? If we compare the pole positions of 2012, we discover that, in Malaysia, Hamilton’s McLaren set a time of 1:36.219, at an average speed of 207.5 km/h, while Lorenzo (Yamaha) was clocked at 2:00.334, at an average speed of 166km/h. In 2011 (with 800cc engines, rather than 1,000), Pedrosa (Honda) was the best performer, achieving a time of 2:01.462 – 25 seconds slower than Vettel (1:34.70) who qualified on pole. The difference was equally significant in Barcelona, despite the presence of an extra chicane that the F1 cars cover in second gear at a mere 95 km/h. Last year, Hamilton took pole on the Catalan circuit at 1:21.707, at an average speed of 205km/h, almost 20 seconds faster than Stoner, who was the fastest in the MotoGP qualification round at 1:41.295, with an average speed of 168km/h.
Not just about loading
So, really, in this hypothetical challenge, there’s no question that the F1 cars are slower on the straights but post faster lap times. And this despite the fact that, in the last ten years, GP bikes have improved their performance by up to 4 seconds through increments comparable to those recorded in 2002, which saw a move from the two-stroke 500’s to the four-stroke 1000’s. On the other hand, the performance of F1 cars have fluctuated. In Sepang, for example, in 2002, Schumacher won pole position with a time of 1:35.266. In 2005, during his time with Renault, Alonso came out on top with a time of 1:32.582 – a result that no one has been able to match since. This happened because, in time, the sports authorities have done everything to limit an escalation in performance by passing increasingly restrictive norms (reduced aerodynamic surfaces, ban on solutions like exhaust blown diffusers, etc.). So, ultimately, we need to ask where is it that the four wheeled machines are accumulating their advantage? We seek the help of someone who, during his career, has worked both on F1 cars and on competition bikes. His name is Claudio Lombardi, head of the Ferrari team (from ’91 to ’95) and designer of the Aprilia engines (from 2000 to 2010). “The first consideration,” he explains, “is loading – for bikes. It’s all about mass, since the aerodynamics are negligible (despite a greater emphasis by Ducati in 2010). A MotoGP bike travels at a speed of up to 300km/h relying only on the modest traction of the rear tire seeing that the front tire barely touches the asphalt on the straights. Consequently, when it starts to brake, there is a moment of instability, of delicate balance, this is why it needs to start braking much earlier.” So braking is the crucial point.
Sure, the F1 car’s downforce allows it to carry more speed on far more longer curves (and the gap increases further as the pace rises), but it’s primarily the slowing down phase that allows F1 cars to gain consistent distance margins on the two-wheelers. This is why we have concentrated on the data released by Brembo, brake system suppliers to six F1 teams (including main rivals Red Bull and Ferrari), along with practically every team competing in the MotoGP (18 riders out of 21 – you’ll find them outlined on the edges of these pages). In Sepang, for instance, F1 cars reach the first braking point at 303km/h (average values given in the data used by Brembo, but they can vary depending on the different aerodynamic choices of the race engineers), while the bikes reach at 327km/h. In terms of speed while entering the turn, the speed of the two are practically identical (90 versus 86km/h). An F1 driver brakes, but only over a distance of 121 metres, and over a time of 2.57 seconds, compared to the 289 metres and the 6.4 seconds necessary for a MotoGP bike. This situation repeats itself in each of the braking zones that the categories share on the same circuit. “The braking of the F1 car,” says Lombardi, “makes use of the four main patches of tyre traction, while the bike, in the absence of vertical load, is intrinsically more unstable.” Bikes will also emerge slower when exiting the curve because the F1 car can rely on a far heavier load, and on better tyre grip, which allows the power to be applied earlier. But, on the successive straights, the bikes recover acceleration and speed (because of the lower rolling resistance), but they also run the risk of falling (which manifests itself with the rearing of the front wheel – popularly known as a wheelie), precisely because of the lack of downforce. There is another aspect that Lombardi deems noteworthy. “With bikes, much still depends on the rider who really marks the difference, to control the machines they ride requires a remarkable balancing act of agility and audacity. It’s no wonder, then, if in the end it’s always the same two or three superstars that pull ahead. Not even the adoption of electronic devices, such as traction control and front wheel anti-wheelie control, have changed this.
It’s still the rider who asks his engineers for calibration, which can be conservative or daring depending on how much risk he wants to take on. In F1, on the other hand, the levelling is more evident. You can spot up to seven or even eight drivers within half a second of each other.” These differences feed into the planning. “While, on cars, the research has concentrated essentially on aerodynamics, using the wind tunnel to spend time and money on fluid dynamic simulation software while cutting back on engine research. With two wheelers, all the focus is still on the engine. In both cases, however, the ultimate goal of the research has not been so much on enhancing pure power. Rather, the determining parameter has been on distribution – when a rider flies at an angle of 35-degrees from the floor, he doesn’t emerge from the curve relying on the handlebar. He must use the throttle control knob, which must be calibrated to perfection, rotating it carefully, and understanding perfectly the corresponding movement – a gradual, continuous, and linear distribution of power.
Otherwise, a fall becomes inevitable.” An extremely delicate game of balance indeed. The same is valid in terms of braking, which is the moment in which the F1 car gains an irrecoverable advantage.
The MotoGP champ speaks
The real difference?
On a bike you have more freedom
Jorge Lorenzo, MotoGP champion in 2012 (and winner of four world championship titles, including two in the 250cc class), explains the difference between driving a racing car over a bike (he has tried GP2 cars). “As far as sensations go,” he says, “the first thing that I realised is that the car doesn’t rise like the bike. In F1, there’s no need to achieve a sense of balance because you can’t fall to your right or to your left. Acceleration and speed are very similar, whereas the braking and speeds in curves are far faster in F1 cars. The bike, however, allows a wider sense of freedom. I remember the first time that I tried a GP2 car, I thought I would be seated when driving, but you are practically lying flat.”
Big Difference
A good 24 seconds separate Hamilton’s pole position in 2012 and Lorenzo’s Yamaha at Sepang – the only track used in the same configuration by both Formula 1 and MotoGP
Write your Comment