moto2 vs 250ccm

MotoGP Forum

Help Support MotoGP Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
cliche guevara

cliche guevara

Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
3,155
Location
siebenbürgen süße heimat!
hey guys, i know that only moto2 bikes can race next year but i thought this year was going to be some sort of transition phase,like in 2002



now did i get something wrong or were the 250s consistenly around 2 seconds a lap quicker thatn the moto2?



i know a 250 is much much more expensive, but when you come to think about it : if aprilia had secured a decent rider and kept their 2 strokes they could have easily won the championship
<




i've read an article where mat oxley states that moto2 is some sort of socialist experiment in motogp (and as we all know,to old bald men anything that implies "same things for everybody" is pure evil and worse than hitler
<
)

anybody share that thought?

as much as i miss the 250s, i always thought that except for the much to big starter grid everything's just fine with moto2 as i thought it would be the pefect class for younger riders to show their talent, ok i'd opt for a spec engine that can be made by any manufacturer but all in all i'm quite happy





just wanted to know what you guys think about it!
 
cliché guevara said:
hey guys, i know that only moto2 bikes can race next year but i thought this year was going to be some sort of transition phase,like in 2002



now did i get something wrong or were the 250s consistenly around 2 seconds a lap quicker thatn the moto2?



i know a 250 is much much more expensive, but when you come to think about it : if aprilia had secured a decent rider and kept their 2 strokes they could have easily won the championship
<




i've read an article where mat oxley states that moto2 is some sort of socialist experiment in motogp (and as we all know,to old bald men anything that implies "same things for everybody" is pure evil and worse than hitler
<
)

anybody share that thought?

as much as i miss the 250s, i always thought that except for the much to big starter grid everything's just fine with moto2 as i thought it would be the pefect class for younger riders to show their talent, ok i'd opt for a spec engine that can be made by any manufacturer but all in all i'm quite happy





just wanted to know what you guys think about it!
Click to expand...

Even though it did create some really good racing, i agree with the guy that compared it to a socialist experiment. This is supposed to be prototype racing, where engineering is king. Instead, its a spec class selling itself as a prototype class. The 250's were light, engineered race bikes, Moto2 is heavy, slightly engineered spec bike. WSS is also faster than Moto2. Its no wonder the 250's are faster than the 600's, they had ahp to weight ration of 1hp to 2 pounds. The Moto 2 has a hp to weight ratio of 1 hp to 2.4 pounds. The 80 pound difference in weight makes a huge difference in corner speed as well as acceleration and top speed
 
povol said:
Even though it did create some really good racing, i agree with the guy that compared it to a socialist experiment. This is supposed to be prototype racing, where engineering is king. Instead, its a spec class selling itself as a prototype class. The 250's were light, engineered race bikes, Moto2 is heavy, slightly engineered spec bike. WSS is also faster than Moto2. Its no wonder the 250's are faster than the 600's, they had ahp to weight ration of 1hp to 2 pounds. The Moto 2 has a hp to weight ratio of 1 hp to 2.4 pounds. The 80 pound difference in weight makes a huge difference in corner speed as well as acceleration and top speed
Click to expand...

but why didn't any of the teams use them when they were so superior?



what upset me about oxleys comment was that he also stated that its a bad thing that the best riders have to go for it more than they used to

he explained this by comparing it "to the good old days" where the best 125 riders would get factory rides and that that would be enough to run at the front even though they're not giving it 100%



like thats a good thing ?
 
I believe Drona banned the 250cc just before the Moto2 season started when they noticed the 250's where about 2 or more seconds per lap faster. It isn't even the straight line speed, those are pretty similar. It's just the sheer cornering speed of the 250's. Even the production based Supersports which don't even run full slicks are faster than the Moto2's.



If Dorna did allow 250's to be run it would've been pretty emberrasing for Dorna as the championship would without a doubt be won by a 250 with a huge margin.
 
Tom is right, the reason behind Moto2 poor lap times is the engines, that have even less power than their superstock counterparts. I think when the engine suppliers realized there would be no competition from the old 250cc, they happily de-tuned the thing from the promised 145+ bhp to 120, to make them last much longer and save money.
biggrin.gif
 
J4rn0 said:
Tom is right, the reason behind Moto2 poor lap times is the engines, that have even less power than their superstock counterparts. I think when the engine suppliers realized there would be no competition from the old 250cc, they happily de-tuned the thing from the promised 145+ bhp to 120, to make them last much longer and save money.
biggrin.gif
Click to expand...



Phillip Island



Moto2, Alex de Angelis - 272.6 kph

250cc, Marco Simoncelli - 268.7 kph

SS, Eugene Laverty - 269.6 kph



Doesn't seem like the Moto2 bikes lack the power.
 
heyhuub said:
Phillip Island



Moto2, Alex de Angelis - 272.6 kph

250cc, Marco Simoncelli - 268.7 kph

SS, Eugene Laverty - 269.6 kph



Doesn't seem like the Moto2 bikes lack the power.
Click to expand...



SS bikes weigh 25kg more yet they achieved the same trap speeds. PI trap speeds are not top speed for either Moto2 bikes or Supersport bikes so you know everything you need to know.
 
Yeah, that means they have more power. But the roughly similar trap speeds indicates their power/weight ratio is roughly similar. So i very much doubt it's that which gives the SS bikes a second per lap advantage.
 
heyhuub said:
Yeah, that means they have more power. But the roughly similar trap speeds indicates their power/weight ratio is roughly similar. So i very much doubt it's that which gives the SS bikes a second per lap advantage.
Click to expand...

i get that the 250s were so much faster because they were much lighter but i don't understand how supersports can be faster than moto2.



engines in wss are about 140 hp right? a standard cbr 600 has 120hp and thats with full exhaust and catalyzer, so i'm guessing moto2 must be around at least 130hp.







just had an idea : moto2 engines are all the same and the gearbox can't be changed right?if you could get your gearing right for every track in wss that would be a huge advantage and wouldn't surprise me if that alone was a second per lap.

but then again those bikes don't have slicks





what is wrong with moto2?
 
heyhuub said:
Phillip Island



Moto2, Alex de Angelis - 272.6 kph

250cc, Marco Simoncelli - 268.7 kph

SS, Eugene Laverty - 269.6 kph



Doesn't seem like the Moto2 bikes lack the power.
Click to expand...



Let's try to explain then. The top speeds are not necessarily a proof and even abstract power figures are relative. When we say that the Moto2 lap slower than the 250 because they lack power, that doesn't mean the Moto2 engines have less bhps than a 250cc engine.



The 2-strokes, lighter 250cc with 120 bhp have higher corner speed and stronger acceleration than the heavier Moto2 and SS bikes with 130 or 140 bhp. Then with a tall ratio a Moto2 may clock a higher top speed, but that doesn't change the fact that it ends up 1 or 2 seconds behind at the end of the lap... The heavier and less precise Moto2 would need 150bhp, imho, to beat the lap times of a 120 bhp 250cc 2-strokes GP bike.
 
The Moto2 bikes only have basic mechanical slipper cutches so they are pretty untidy getting into the turns, that'll be costing them time
 
J4rn0 said:
Let's try to explain then. The top speeds are not necessarily a proof and even abstract power figures are relative. When we say that the Moto2 lap slower than the 250 because they lack power, that doesn't mean the Moto2 engines have less bhps than a 250cc engine.



The 2-strokes, lighter 250cc with 120 bhp have higher corner speed and stronger acceleration than the heavier Moto2 and SS bikes with 130 or 140 bhp. Then with a tall ratio a Moto2 may clock a higher top speed, but that doesn't change the fact that it ends up 1 or 2 seconds behind at the end of the lap... The heavier and less precise Moto2 would need 150bhp, imho, to beat the lap times of a 120 bhp 250cc 2-strokes GP bike.
Click to expand...



Yeah i get why the 250's are faster. This was more about the SS bikes which don't have a clear straight line advantage and don't have full slicks, yet are faster over a lap.
 
heyhuub said:
Yeah i get why the 250's are faster. This was more about the SS bikes which don't have a clear straight line advantage and don't have full slicks, yet are faster over a lap.
Click to expand...





Regarding that we return to the first answer: the SS bikes engines are more tuned than the Moto2 ones (at least for the moment).
 
J4rn0 said:
Regarding that we return to the first answer: the SS bikes engines are more tuned than the Moto2 ones (at least for the moment).
Click to expand...



Yeah duh, but what does tuned mean? More power, yet they are no faster on the straights.
 
heyhuub said:
Yeah duh, but what does tuned mean? More power, yet they are no faster on the straights.
Click to expand...



OK - back to basics. Top speed depends a lot on the choice of final gear ratio, that will change according to track and rider preferences. A more powerful bike with a slightly shorter gear ratio could hit the same speeds (or even marginally slower) on the straights, but would be much stronger when accelerating out of the corners.
 
Tom said:
The Moto2 bikes only have basic mechanical slipper cutches so they are pretty untidy getting into the turns, that'll be costing them time
Click to expand...

didn't even know they had slipper clutches
<
wish they hadn't,breaking while downshifting is one of the hardest thing to do properly on a motorcycle,would be good to see those guys do it the oldfashioned way





so was i right that moto2 have "fixed gearboxes" or whatever you want to call them?if thats the case i'd like to know if somebody knows at which speed the bikes hit the limiter in 6th?280-ish?
 

Similar threads

#22
Top 10 MotoGP rider moves of the MotoGP era.
2
Replies
23
Views
1K
#22
#22
M
Motorcycle Racing Industry: Reading the Tea Leaves
2 3
Replies
44
Views
3K
Hollywood
Hollywood
Jumkie
CRUTCHLOW: Disregard for Safety
Replies
11
Views
2K
Gaz
G
MigsAngel
Moto2 riders failing in MotoGP?
2
Replies
20
Views
8K
povol
povol
shaunna
Motulsuperfan experience at Phillip Island
Replies
8
Views
2K
wickie08
W

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions

Back
Top