Discussion in 'Access Norton Pub' started by pantah_good, Dec 1, 2017.
The clip really doesn't do the GP17 justice. In person, it sounds like a rock crusher on steroids.
Whenever I see bikes doing that, I wonder what it would be like to lose one half-way around a corner - big thrill ?
Your 2017 MotoGP Champion.
You might think that is the quickest way around a corner, but I don't know that it is. If the bike is more vertical and turns under itself tightening it's line, it might be faster. The trouble is it would probably be easier to high-side.
For me, it would have been the quickest way to bust my ass. For Marquez, it's just another day at the office.
It must be easy to do or he would not be doing it. The exertion would turn you off it, if it didn't happen naturally.
A combination of catlike balance, superb hand-eye coordination and uncanny feel for what the tires are doing. Easy is not a word I would use unless I could prove it. The tires and chassis of MotoGP bikes are light-years ahead of anything else. A few years ago, Marco Simoncelli died when a lurid two-wheel slide turned deadly as the tires bit traction and catapulted his machine 90 degrees to the direction of the other bikes. The video looks like CGI until you suspend belief as to what a motorcycle could actually physically do.
Most riders these days seem to be much more tyre-dependent than we were in the old days. A spot of rain really brings them undone.
Well, you learn to use what's available at the time. Tires and oil, along with metallurgy are the biggest differences between now and then, so you wouldn't expect racers to go back to single-weight dino oil just to prove something. They say all the electronic aids have turned some mediocre riders into good ones, but the same guys are always at the top.
And back in the day, a slick was just a worn-out tire.
At Indy Mile a few years ago, Kenny Roberts rode a replica of the TZ750 tracker he used to win the 1975 event and was later banned. His comment after a few laps of spewing dirt on the spectators was, "I wish we had these tires 40 years ago!"
If we all had Yamaha TZ750 flat trackers, would the racing be better than if we all had 500cc Jawa speedway bikes ? - Do spectators go to race meetings to see riders crash and is that entertainment which funds participation in the sport ?
I never knew a slick was just a worn-out tyre. They were banned in historic racing, so I never had them and could not afford them anyway. That TZ750 flat tracker had a crank in it which cost $3000 to rebuild in the old days. In a flat tracker, it was sheer waste. You could have bought two Jawa speedway bikes for the same money as the crank rebuild in a TZ750.
To my mind, THIS is much more interesting than any MotoGP race which has all the latest and greatest modern innovations :
Well it's definitely easier to watch and follow because they're going so SLOW. But really, good racers make for good racing. Doesn't matter which era or discipline. You can appreciate the old-timers for being able to hustle those old harvesters around and by the same token, you should appreciate the modern guys' ability to even hang on.
If you were to see a few MotoGPs in person and follow some riders for a few years you'd gain the same appreciation for that as you have for classic racing.
If we all had the same anything there would be no variety, the spice of life. But I have seen both Speedway and flat track races and Speedway does not compare. There were tons of TZ roadracers, so somebody could afford the cranks. Winning has a way of mitigating costs. I doubt anyone goes for the crashes. We're not talking NASCAR here. But if crashing weren't a possibility, where would be the fun?
Am I the only guy here that grew up with hydroplanes? The sound of those bad boys at full throttle still gives me wood and I'm in my late 60's. Rolls Merlin, Packard, twin Chrysler Hemis, and the king, THE ROLLS GRIFFFON ( 2500+ bhp) Oh boy O boy. I always rooted for whom ever could give the Griffon equipped Budweiser a run for her money but still... that sound as she came blasting down the straight away, HOLY CRAP, it was awesome!!! I I I guess that you had to be there. I'm sure glad that I had this opportunity to see and hear these gracious ladies in their prime. Now that the turbine is the power of choice, I've lost interest.I feel sorry for those that never had a chance to witness this spectacle in person. Oh boy, I got wood just reminiscing about this.
Merry Christmas my friends
You must be. I grew up on airplanes, here's a Griffon powered P-51 air racer video with 3 pretty good sounding passes (at about 3:20, 4:20, and 5:00) at speed. It does seem rather healthy. Merry Christmas.
Danno, My ideal form of road racing would be a group for four - stroke singles and twins. No two strokes or four cylinder bikes. If they were all in the same capacity classes, the bikes would be fairly evenly matched regardless of differences in technology. Then if you win, you have actually proved something. When you put a TZ750 flat tracker on a circuit with four-stroke flat trackers, what are you proving ? I once had the opportunity to buy a tired TZ750 motor for $4000 and I had the right Egli frame for it. Why would I do that ? If it won an historic race, what would I have proved ? A TZ750 flat-tracker is simply a waste of a good motor.
Have you seen the videos of the WizNorton rotaries ? What do they prove when there is nothing which can get near them ? You see it once, then what ?
Not sure if any racing is about proving anything. Nobody remembers who came in second, but there are a shitload of people behind that person. I like ALL forms of bike racing, regardless of what's out there. It's up to the santioning bodies to decide what's fair and it's up to everyone else to complain about the result. Racing is mostly throwing money down a rathole anyway, so the TZ tracker was a treat and a thrill and had it been allowed to continue competing, would have done the same thing to flat track as the Indian FTR 750 is doing for (to) it now. Winning. And raising fan interest, attracting sponsorship dollars filling the pages of magazines etc. I'm trying to see a downside, but the only downside is the competiton (mostly H-D) was let off the hook and more years went by with flat track racing mired in a harley tire-sized rut.
Ditto that. I grew up in Seattle as well and my mate lived across the street from tje waterfront between tje bridges. Hydro thunder...awesome.
When events attract more entries because of improved spectator appeal, does that mean the competitors are no longer need to be a major source of profit for the promoters ? Perhaps being blown to the weeds by an extremely expensive two-stroke is not a Harley rider's idea of fun ? So there would only be one bike left racing.
When you race you need the losers to make you look good and give you a sense of achievement.
There WAS practically only one bike left racing flat track, but it sure wasn't a TZ.
Separate names with a comma.