2010 Silverstone World Superbike Superpole Results: Updated

I don't know about total race times but I know the Michelin qualifyers were really fast.
I think they had front as well as rears

Well we know the suzuki has caught up to its cousing MGP bike, and for the record, Cal would have been 5th fastest in the MGP race qualifying!

http://www.motogp.com/en/Results+Statistics/2010/GBR/MotoGP/QP/Classific...

You think the Moto GP times would be this close to WSBK times if there was a 'tire war' going on between Brand B & Brand M? ADD IN that Rossi & the Aliens are the ones turning the times & something 'smells in raceland'!!!! I'd like to hear what Spies says about this since he's the 'newest' member of the Moto GP club!

It's very difficult to compare. Fuel capacity is the main difference, imo. MotoGP bikes are faster in a straight line, and they probably have higher cornerspeed b/c they weigh less. However, I think SBKs would destroy MotoGP bikes off the bottom and in the midrange.

I'll try to explain what I think is happening, I hope it makes sense.

In MotoGP they have only 21L of fuel. Cornerspeed is critical for fuel economy b/c braking wastes energy, but cornerspeed gets riders hurt and it causes some areas of the circuits to be unsafe. Dorna have addressed this issue by regulating the front tire (imo, it actually started in 2008 with an agreement between Michelin and Bridgestone, they did the same thing in F1).

I think the GP front tire profile is less aggressive and the carcass is softer than technology actually allows. As a result it can only handle so much corner entry g-force before the contact patch deforms and the front tire lets go. Unfortunatley, teams can't go slower in the corners b/c they only have 21L. To maintain cornerspeed, the teams throw as much weight over the rear tire as possible..

WSBK has no fuel capacity restrictions so SBK teams don't have any compelling incentive to ride cornerspeed. Cornerspeed lines might not even be preferable b/c people can block pass more easily. Instead, SBKs are set up for running late-apex point and shoot style. The qualifying tire allows cornerspeed style, imo, this is why Crutchlow is so fast in Superpole, but he can't win.

Long story short, the SBKs have more low-end grunt and midrange, and the bikes have more weight over the front end. When the SBK crack the throttle open, the front end stays down. On a GP bike with a rearward bias, wheelie control is working overtime. As the speed increases the aero advantage and power advantage of the GP bike allows much higher top speed.

If GP went back to 24L, I suspect they would gain a lot of time b/c they would ride SBK lines, but GP bikes would achieve much faster acceleration and higher top speeds.

Just a guess, but it makes sense to me.

I really dont like to compare different championships, because it doesnt reflect the reality

Moto GP is way faster, if you line up a wsbk machine in there, it would always be at the bottom.

Sure 2 o 3 seconds off the pace doesnt look like much, but after 25 laps, thats a 50 or 60 seconds difference.

But to be honest wsbk today, is more interesting than motogp, there are at least 7 or 8 riders in the battle for the podium; meanwhile motogp, it has been the same riders, with the exception of dovi and ben.

and if you want to compare, F1 cars would be out of this world, because they have lap record of 1'30, thats more than 30 seconds, ¿so how true is that motorcycle are faster than cars?

About as true as a unicycle is faster than a motorcycle.

Aero advantage of G.P bikes Phoenix? 20kmph is a hell of a lot of speed. Both 4 cyl GP & WSBK machines have similar power outputs in the realm of 230hp. GP machines are 15kg lighter, and the Bridgestone tyres are supposedly superior to the Pirelli's. So surely a GP machines main advantage is it's corner speed and ability to carry that speed off the corner negating a WSBK machines presumed superior 'stomp' when the throttles are opened. Not to mention the later braking abilities provided to the carbon brakes.

The Pirelli's have come on a great deal in recent times and do not really get ridden in point and squirt style (not by Biaggi or Rea anyway). GP machines eek out their advantage in decending order of importance via a combo of less weight, marginally better tyres and brakes all of which contribute (along with stiffer chassis') to higher corner speed & better lap times.

I also wonder does a 'softer' superbike ride Silverstones bumps better than a 'stiffer' GP machine? Perhaps this is where Haslam in particular had an advantage over his GP brethren. No other way to explain similar lap times with a 20kmph speed differential.