F1 car vs superkart

[Ciro Pabón]

on a race kart not a superkart but runs at 17,000rpm

Uh, what runs at 17,000 rpm? The engine?

Well, recent KF1 engines are limited to 16.000, but of course it is the engine.

A four stroke will give you around 11.000 rpm.

A twin 250 cc 4 stroke, not revving that fast, also give you 90 Hp, and it is essentially bolted to your behind so, technically speaking, the power/weight relationship is like 1.000.000 Hp per kilo (give or take, depending on the bolts you use and the size of your ass). They make 0 to 100 kph in 3 seconds.

I don't know why people is unable to understand that karts are better than F1. The races are better too.

Kart at Laguna Seca: it might be slightly slower but you'll feel like you're doing 3 million kph on three wheels (or better yet, just two wheels, take a look at the bumps of this horrible asphalt)
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpceUbXq7z4[/youtube]

BTW, if you build a circuit, do not judge the pavement until karters talk with you.

Lambo vs kart. The winner? Of course, darling.... and it's just drag racing, btw
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-hhPJfw ... re=related[/youtube]

Corvette C5 vs kart. Duh
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-NfvxXexis&NR=1[/youtube]

Corvette vs 125 cc kart. Humiliation. Notice how the kart forces you to be more precise, while the Corvette in the curves is a drunken sailor walking on the plank of a pirate ship in the middle of a hurricane
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBzeCbS9 ... re=related[/youtube]

Viper vs kart: see you later, alligator. This video is TOO long, I don't even know where the race starts, but I skipped here and there and the Viper is a truck in curves, by design (it's american, you know, so it has engine and seats, but no suspension... as the kart)
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TePHhXo0 ... re=related[/youtube]

Ferrari vs kart. That's an easy one. Jump to 2:10 to watch the race. There is only one winner, you know. Crescenzo over Enzo. It's what I call the HP/hype relationship
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZStTJ7W7 ... re=related[/youtube]

Frankly, I would say that the Kart World Champion should be automatically given the F1 WDC and Ferrari, McLaren and the other makers of overdeveloped karts would save a lot of money (and time).

Anyway, if FIA doesn't take my suggestion it doesn't matter. That's what always happens: the kart champion is the best driver in the world. No driver help, downforce is a secondary thought. That's what I call racing. The rest is people with too much money in their hands. They love AutoCAD more than racing.

Braiiiiinnnnnssss...... mmmm. Yummy.

With all those zombie threads and the invasion of UK F1Fanatics issues, I'm wondering if we actually have run out of themes... they are all here already! (or at F1Fanatics) Tomba should make a directory, lock new threads and sell the directory of issues to new webmasters for Formula One sites. Then we can go around in circles arguing which driver/car is better/more beautiful and if Alonso and Ham are/are not pr1cks.

I will start soon a thread on the most beautiful mirrors in F1 history and another on the advantages of low profile tyres, not forgetting to resurrect the dimpled golf ball one.

OMG. I just read what I wrote.

I've transformed myself into the grumpy old guy in the forum that is always saying: "We already had a thread on that..."

On the other hand, you could say that this grumpy old guy is not a troll: he's a trill.

[N12ck]

Ciro completely agree, there is more overtaking, and what class do you drive? TKM for me

[Ciro Pabón]

The class I like more is KZ2, but these days I only teach. I like to take a lap once in a while in the underpowered ones. I drive sometimes a kart with a Yamaha KT100 Sportsman that they have at the track, just to keep the "smoothness" alive (you understand me, I guess: power hides your mistakes).

[Jeffsvilleusa]

Frankly, I would say that the Kart World Champion should be automatically given the F1 WDC and Ferrari, McLaren and the other makers of overdeveloped karts would save a lot of money (and time).

Do you think Liuzzi is of champion calibre? Perhaps it says something that he is still getting drives.

[Ciro Pabón]

Oh, my. Does tongue in cheek still mean something in English?

Anyway, Jeffsvilleusa, yes. I do believe any kart champion has what it takes to be a winner in F1.

On the other hand, speaking to the rocks and trees and wild beasts that could be interested, I dare to say that your fortunes in F1 do not depend on your abilities, but on the abilities of your manager.

I'd say 80% or more of your F1 career depends on the car you get, the political regulations that happens to be enforced during the years you compete and the whims of the team manager and mechanics you depend on.

Today I'm posting elsewhere some words by the unforgettable and unforgotten Florián González (a NASCAR-material guy, Jeff!), that happened to win the F1 championship. They might be enlightening.

[N12ck]

I agree with you ciro completely, i drive TKM, and it is awesome, its not about your kart or vehicle, its about how you set it up and how you drive it.

F1 is all about aerodynamics, and the winners are only those who have the best aerodynamic package, take red bull for example with their flexi wings etc

[N12ck]

and power does hide mistakes!

[Jeffsvilleusa]

Oh, my. Does tongue in cheek still mean something in English?

Quite- I just was hoping to "sit at your feet" for a moment

Anyway, thanks for the response, please pardon my rudeness.

I look forward to hearing about Froilán González.

[MaysEffect]

sorry..not sorry for bringing this thread back from the dead, but i've had my mind set on making my own superkart for a few months now and this seemed like a good yet odd comparison.

Being that F1 cars are now at a peak again in multiple aspects , most notably, the overall size, weight, speed and safety. i feel its a good time to argue some of the benefits of having a truly ultra light raceKar(t).

It seems superkart racing has fallen off the face of the earth in a lot of ways in the past years. Not only that, but even the remaining leagues available are running old tech that hasn't really been changed at all in decades. The reasoning being simple, cost and return in investment. Where as in almost every other racing category outside of karting, the technology and safety aspect has made monumental leaps in the past years.

That being said, i'm interested in knowing how quick are current superkarts compared to smaller single seaters such as F3/4 and indylights?

Also what type of changes can be made to the current superkarts that would cost that much, but could modernize the design? Suspension, tires, engines?

[J.A.W.]

These guys: http://vinsmotors.com/modelli/duecinqua ... e/?lang=en may be able to help..

For a price..

Or pehaps more realistically, contact 'Wobbly' on this site: https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/show ... gine-tuner

[MaysEffect]

thats a nice looking bike, but i dont get the relevance...

what does this wobbly person do?

[J.A.W.]

thats a nice looking bike, but i dont get the relevance...

what does this wobbly person do?

M-E, you could ask yourself.. 'What engines do Superkarts use?' & perhaps then, you might see "the relevance".

& 'Wobbly' - designs, tunes & builds championship winning cart engines..
Does ~50hp at the sprocket, from a very rules constrained 125cc single - seem reasonable - to you?

[MaysEffect]

Well I didn't need to ask myself that because I already knew that information, and to be honest on your second point, no it doesn't. Tuners have been claiming 50hp from 125cc engines for years now, usually with a lot of caveats, some being extremely high compression and the need for race fuel with horrible efficiency throughout the entirety of the Rev range. Also considering it has no cost benefits over a heavier 4 stroke that can easily accept forced induction unlike a 2 stroke.

In terms of power to weight advantages, a super small 125cc 2stroke on a light chassis will always be a good package. But my point remains, it's still dead technology with very limited efficiency and room for innovation outside of it's weight and power density, which is only relevant if you don't have a lot of mass to move around. The torque figures on a 125cc are absolutely garbage, which isn't a huge problem within itself, but as soon as you start adding any load to the motor it immediately starts to show problems. You can argue that this dilemma can be solved through various means of mechanical changes, but it is still a problem.

I have zero plans on investing anytime with those types of engines, but I do appreciate your suggestions. Also I'm in the states, so working with other entities outside the US is not a huge option for me.

[J.A.W.]

Well, M-E, if you aint interested, so be it.. however, if you could be bothered to check out the link provided,
then you'd see - your assumptions are incorrect..

[MaysEffect]

I looked through both links, neither answer any of my initial questions. What about my "assumptions" are wrong? that 2stroke engines are dead technology? or that 50hp isnt impressive? My original questions had nothing to do with wether or not those engines are worth investing in. I had/have no interest in even talking about the pros and cons on that matter, so i dont get why you are pushing that issue, i dont think there will be any relevant info i need in those 1000+ pages of discussion over motorcycle 2strokes.

Please re-read my original post.