[Turbo329]

Originally Posted by bsess

Their assessments are valid but to what extent and in what realm in terms of performance capabilities? Let's say, for example, that a bunch of journalists are testing the M1 and RCV at Phillip Island and the assessment of each of the bike's characteristics and performance is based on the journos' abilities to run laps not slower than 1:45.00 but no faster than 1:36.00. Are the evaluations they make within these parameter valid? Yes and no. They are certainly valid within the context of the lap times achieved but not in terms of what the bikes might be like when running laps in the 1:29.00-1:31.00 range where the characteristics and performance traits for each of the bikes may be radically different. A Honda that is stable on the brakes, turns in sweetly, holds its line and gets good drive off the corners at the Journos pace may be squirmy on the brakes, difficult to turn in, struggle with edge grip mid corner, and push the front wide when trying to generate drive off the exit when trying to circulate at a sub 1:31.00 pace. But the Journos will have no way of knowing this because they are nowhere near these limits and thus are not able to explore how the bike behaves at the more extreme ends of the performance spectrum. Since this discussion is about how the bikes compare to each other at the MotoGP level, how can journos possibly make a fair assessment of the same if they're going nowhere near as fast?

This is by FAR the greatest post of ALL time regarding comparos!!! Kudos!!!!