How Honda's IMPOSSIBLE Engine BROKE MotoGP!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 бер 2024
- Back in the early 2000's. Honda made a geniuus engine, that in theory shouldn't have existed!
Watch This Next: • Why MotoGP Teams Cost ...
My Equipment Affiliate Links:
⌨️ Keychron K10 ISO Mechanical Keyboard: amzn.to/3vjTGf7
Driving4Answers incredible technical breakdown here: • Logic Defying V5 Engin... - Авто та транспорт
Perhaps Honda should get ANGRY again and perhaps start winning races again?
Who would get angry? Mr Honda isn't there to be angry anymore :(, we need his stubbornness and his passion back, in a place in the company where that someone would have a say in things..
Honda ain't gonna be winnin ANYTHING for quite some time... 😂
They need to pay for a skilled rider first
@@greenmarine5 they were paying top dollar for Marc Marquez, The bike just isn't good. Gotta upgrade the HRC crue
They’re too busy dominating Formula 1, Hypercar, and Indycar.
they should sell a v5
Imagine if they did!
It would be obviously very expensive but on the other hand, there's always been a strong market for exotica like Ducati special editions, MV Agusta and Bimota.
@@keyboarddancers7751yeah but whoever is in charge in Honda doesn't have any inspiration or balls anymore, they've been boring for a decade plus :(
Working on a V4 engine (and the fuel system) is hard enough. My experience with carb boots/ intake runners was tougher than a straight, inline engine or a V twin.
@@rns6889Many manufacturers are moving away from the inlin4 and V4 layouts, and you are suggesting that they offer a V5? Maybe as a hyper exotic halo bike...
Honda has forgotten more 4-stroke technology than most companies have learned
Yeah, and that seems to be their current problem. They have apparently forgotten so much that they're racing mid-pack at best...
@@joe-g1749 hell only Marini finished last race and poor guy was last
@@joe-g1749they are at the back of the grid in motogp.
@@joe-g1749they have the highest sales of all motorbike makers so they’re fine
That’s because they’re cheap and plentiful. Honda hasn’t had any passion for anything, especially performance, since Mr Honda passed. It’s just another Japanese refrigerator maker. It’s sad really. It’s not that they don’t have the capacity, they have no desire/passion. It’s all about the money and/or their “aversion to taking risks” culture.
What Honda did with the crank angle to solve the V5 puzzle was genius.
But 5 cylinder engines work well, even in a straight engine.
Like the 2.5L petrol Audi engine in my humble VW T4 Transporter.
With petrol engines between 2 and 3 liters. A four gets too rough, and a six gets too long.
Five works. With the caveat of fuel injection.
Trying to get a straight 5 run with a single carb is damn near impossible.
and volkswagen has a v5 engine if i am correct couuld be wrong or its vr5
@@8alakai8it's a VR5 and VR engines aren't the greatest. A VR6 is pretty good when boosted. But N/A they really suck
when does i4 ever get too rough?
@@glennverdeyen5685what do you base your opinion on?
@@judod97 it's not an opinion ist facts. VR6 R32 and R36 all have weak power stock. Maxing with the R32 at 250hp en the R36 a little more. These power levels are pathetic. As a 1.8T with a stage one tune makes 250hp. And absolutely destroys a R32. Then you have fuel consumption which on the VR6 is insane. And the newe engines aren't that much beter. The cilinderhead and the way it is designed is just bad as 3 cilinders have a way longer runner.
But throw some boost at these engines and they make decent power. These are real known facts
I think some Honda engineers lay awake at night coming up with these things while their competitors are comparatively lazy or less skilled.
In the old days of real engineers with purpose, yes. Now there are mostly software engineers and programmers with no one to design/build anything other than video games and pseudo-intelligent AI.
@@joe-g1749 Totally agree. I'm 67 mechanical engineer and what I see is young engineers searching their solutions on Google or AI instead of lighting their own mind power. Seems the brains are asleep. More confortable I guess. The best clue is the new manufacturing process which are as expensive as the stupidity of the design. Thinking about conception is also thinking about manufacturing. But actual engineers dont care about this cause most of them dont know anything about machining. The result is a huge garbage and tons if ships...pathetic
Honda's prowess in Motorsport is absurdly brilliant
I miss when Honda still made innovative and experimental designs...
Oval Pistons with 2 connecting rods per piston. Remember??. Incredible that those even ran as long as they did.
That was not this engine!
A 5 cylinder had the same weight limit as a 4 when GP went to 990cc
At that time it was also not as much about fuel conservation and the max tank size was quite generous, they didn’t want half the field running out of gas on the last lap in 2002.
My guess is everyone assumed a five was not practical but Honda (and later Team KR) did it
Team Proton KR couldn't get their engine to work reliably and ended up leasing Honda engines, which worked out better for them. KR JR ended up getting a podium after they got Honda engines. He might have even won that race if he had remembered the difference between the white and chequered flags.
I was coming on to point this out. All other cylinder numbers had their own weight minimum. 2 cyl had the lowest weight minimum, 6 cyl(the upper limit) had the highest. 3 cyl was different than 4 cyl. But, mysteriously, 5 cyl was the same as 4. Hmmmm. And Honda just so happens to come out with a 5 cyl. Crazy.
so the reason why they didnt go with v6 is because they can get a lighter engine? interesting@stk0308
@@jwork5680 6 cylinders had the same weight limits as 4-5 cylinder using oval cylinders (155kg) which was 10kg more than the 4-5 round cylinders. A huge difference.
Considering some of Honda's multi-cylinder mini monsters from the 50's & 60's, the only surprise is that it wasn't a V10 that revved to 25k+...
That was a great breakdown. At the beginning I tried to imaging how I would do it. I wasn't even close.
Remember the 2T NS500 that won the 500cc championshp was a V3.
I may be wrong on this but didnt they have a 5 cylinder back in the 60s? I think it was a 250 and the RPM range was insane.
Six cylinder
@@theoneracer2716 The RC149 was a 125cc, 4 valve, 5 cylinder (based on the 50cc twin) thar peaked at about 18000 RPM - 1966 I think
Very nicely done mate. Subbed.
I wasn't going believe you until I realized your "hat was on backwards"... then I knew you must be right. Very COoL. You RoCk!
Recently discovered your channel and man this is a goldmine
Thanks! Glad you liked the video :)
You do a great job explaining the mysteries of weird engine configurations. Thanks for the info.
Glad you liked it Mark!
During that time Aprilia ran 3 cylinder engines built by Cosworth, using F1 tech. They, the RS Cube, were the first GP bikes with ride by wire and pneumatic valve train and were considered the most powerful engines on the grid. However the electronic rider aids weren't nearly developed enough and the Cubes were extremely difficult to ride and also had other issues, one caught fire and tried to cook Colin Edwards.
That was because the fuel cap wasn't secured and fuel spilled on to engine/exhaust.
Human error rather than mechanical
I believe minimum weight regulations played a role too; going to a V6 would have raised the min. weight (undoing some of the power advantage) but going to a 5 allowed them to keep the same weight as the 4-cyl while getting the benefit of the added piston, ie. best of both worlds
that makes alot of sense now, no wonder they went all of that
At 2:52 describes using common crankpins while the image is of individual crankpins. Couldn't stop myself from pointing this out.
May have missed that one good spot :D
I went into the comments to see if someone else noticed it too, also at 5:01 - 5:07 when he talks about the balance of a 90° V4 he shows a V engine with a different bank angle to demonstrate it
Amazing engineering, good video explaining it all, thanks
Interesting video but Honda's withdrawal from GP racing in the 60s (both 2 and 4 wheels) was not due to rule changes but the enormous drain on the company's resources and a need to prioritise efforts for normal production of products to sell. The company had by then achieved its objectives in establishing a strong global reputation for their engineering prowess.
And now I know about this V5, I need on in my life
Interesting story! Ir would be fascinating to hear how the designer engineer(s) came up with so radical a concept, let alone then convinced management to fund its development.
Honda also raced with an oval pistoned V4.
1979. Known as the OX. It was 500 cc It required 2 connecting rods per piston and had 8 valves per cylinder.
@@nelsonbergman7706 NR500
Honda NR750
An excellent presentation. The explanation of primary balance in a V5 was well put. But the back-to-front baseball cap! Really? At your age? Despite that, I've subscribed.
I appreciate you subscribing. Would it be better facing the correct way?
The math is so interesting. I never understood before how they did it, now I do. Thanks.
Can you please tell me which simulation is that when Doohan rides a 2T Rothmans Honda and is there an editor available for it?
V.Z.
Hey Vlad, this was filmed on MotoGP 2021 the game :)
Imagine a 750cc or 990 two stroke engine - would be interesting to see in comparison regarding the power this might generate with the new technology like anti-wheeling and traction control
Two strokes don't make more power because they have more pulses. They have very short power strokes due to the cylinders having large holes in them. The reason they make more power is the scavenging actions provided by the pipe. The figure that the AMA and the FIM came up with was 1.6 X. So when they gave the four strokes a displacement advantage, they were well aware that they were giving them and unfair advantage. That's why they banned the two strokes altogether when they went to 800cc. They didn't want two strokes to compete on anything like a level playing field. Many of the professional motocross riders would actually prefer their 450cc engines were limited to 350cc. For the same reason that the open class two stroke bikes disappeared. The 450s make more power than is necessary and the extra weight, gyro, and power only makes the bikes harder and less safe to ride.
While Honda was overtaking other bikes in straight, still remember that goosebump triggering line from star sports commentator.. “Look at the power of Honda!!”
It was a genius idea - they got the best of both worlds by having the high revs of an inline 3 on one bank, and the torque of a twin on the other bank.
Amazing vid - TY ❤❤
nice video. I do wish Honda still ran a v5
Love the video!😁😁
Be interesting to throw 500cc Direct Injected 2-Strokes into the mix but I doubt we'll ever see that.
Good info, thanks.👍
DI adds weight and complexity. The things that 2 strokes are supposed to be, a DI 2 stroke isn't. BRP tried it with their ETEC line of 2 stroke engines, and look where they ended up. It was less expensive and lighter weight to buy a comparable 4 stroke. And generally speaking, also more reliable.
Unbelievable, fun, and thorough review. Peace
Honda has always had some of the best engineering minds in the world. Having said that, they haven't been competitive in Moto GP in a loooooong time....
Did not mention how good the V5 sounds.
After Honda with Mike Hailwood destroyed every other bike manufacturer on the inline 6, in the 60s, the rules were changed to "engines will have less than 6 cylinders". Not sure if this is still the case.
“My boy is wicked smart” 😉
There may be a point you are missing. I had read that since Honda was racing a v4 in WSB and had been for a very long time, they had complete knowledge of its advantages. No one else had a v four. If you take the v-750 ( RC45) and add a 5th cylinder you basically get the 990cc moto gp engine. I know its not that simple but Honda had decades of v four engineering behind them.
That's an interesting observation, and very likely what really played in there. That would also have meant they could reuse a lot of the same race parts they already were making for the other league, thus driving relative costs down.
@@jpdj2715 except manufacturers are not allowed to use production (WSBK) based parts in prototype (MotoGP) engines.
Doug Hele designed a V5 for Triumph back in the 1960s - 70s. I am pretty sure he knew what he was doing.
How about the honda st1100 and st1300 abs tourer bikes ....
So why did they stop racing it? Rule changes?
Yes. In the 990 era, 4 cylinder and 5 cylinder were allowed the same weight restrictions. In 2007 capacity was reduced from 990cc to 800cc and the weight restrictions were modified and it was no longer an advantage to try and run a 5 cylinder.
How about the NR motor? That was truly bizarre
It had to be in order to try to match the power of the 2-strokes. It was essentially a v-8 cleverly packaged as a V4 (IIRC, cylinders were limited to 4, hence Honda's decision to put 2 pistons together to create an oval-piston V4)
great dissection
Truly fascinating. Full credit all round.
If more pistons provide more power pulses, why not go V6?
Obviously square pistons would be more compact, what could possibly go wrong..................?
They should build a 2+4 stroke engine combined. Two 250 cc cylinders running 2-stroke and three 330 cc cylinders running 4-stroke. On the same crankshaft.
Why did the V5 go away?
Hos yes the V5 compare to crtossplane crank motors? Seems liokle the cpssplane does what the V5 .
It always helps to have an extra spark plug burning the fuel as well
Seems to me a V4 would have a rocking couple unless the middle 2 pistons were on the same bank and the outside 2 on the other. If this were the case then there will be a gap between the other banks outside pistons, may as well stick a 5th piston in there.
You are correct, a "traditional" V4 has a slight rocking couple vibration. Honda did make a street bike V4 with a 2 throw crank that had the back cylinder con-rods mounted on the inside (allegedly to give a narrower cylinder block between the knees) and the front cylinder con-rods mounted in the outside (allegedly to give a space between the front cylinders for the front wheel, thus allowing the engine to be mounted further forward in the frame). This type of V-4 would have no rocking couple...
A modern 450cc inline-six would be nice, probably make about 100hp?
Nah, no V5... Give us back the CBX
While saying pistons on oposit sides share a common pin, a graphic shows them on seperate pins?!?!?! (min 2.58)
Rpm makes horsepower displacement makes torque
Power = torque X rpm. As you can see from this formula, torque and power are two sides of the same coin (related by RPM)...
Awesome! Superbly explained 👍👏👌
Looks like Honda has very aggresive R&D but conservative in marketing. I've heard they have one of the biggest R&D budget in industries.
Yes, they indeed likely have more budget than ALL OTHER Japanese brands combined. The European teams found a way to access the budget of others'(Audi), plus they do everything with "passion". The last time Japan attacked something with passion, they island country was literally destroyed and rebuilt by those very destroyers. Anyway, they(Honda) haven't yet realized how badly they suck in all forms of racing. Suzuki realized they didn't have the desire(passion) or money to design competitive machinery and bailed out. Yamaha will eventually fold unless they take a leap.
Nah, they sell too much motorcycle. Selling small displacement bike in SEA and SA region in big quantities is source of honda money (no official data but back in supercub era, they sell those bike like hot cake and they can fund RnD for RC series and F1)
The Honda and astra marketing team in Indonesia is on another level. They can maintain 70% market share in Indonesia even if their most selling bike in Indonesia has design flaws and their factory has quality control issues. They are capable of production and selling million bikes in a year.
At 2:53 the pistons DO NOT share the same crank pin!
Sounded like you said V4 engines share the same crank pins yet the animation you used sure looks like each rod was on its own pin....no? 2:50 Oh wait are the crank pins much more than pins in that animation? Is each one a Z kinda thing staggering the rod positions on the two rods? Rather than straight pins with both con rods sharing identical axis well exactly like each pair of rods do in your animation of the V5 3:06
As anyone would know , the reason for the 500 two stroke and 990 four stroke is both engines are really the same size ! Since a 2 stroke fires twice as often a 500 cc two stroke displaces the same amount of air as a 1000 four stroke firing twice as often ! Just like they still call a Mazda rotary 13b a 1.3 litre but in reality it moves 3.9 litres , as it runs on a different cycle , a rotor is a triangle , each side of a triangle displaces 650cc X 3 X 2 rotors ! Mazda is cheating , it's only counting one 650cc side of the rotor and one side 650cc on the other making 1300cc , fake it's like having a 5.0 V8 but only counting the 2 cylinders that are firing and so 1300cc and leaving out the other 6 cylinders ! Point is a 500 cc two stroke 4cyl fires the same amount of times at say 3000 revs as a 1000cc four-stroke 8cyl. And moves the same amount of air in both !
Comparing the displacement of 2-stroke, 4-stroke and Mazda rotary engines. A total cycle for the 2-stroke is one engine output revolutions. The 4-stroke needs two engine revs and the Mazda 13b (Wankel) engine needs three revs. Thus the Mazda 3900cc (650cc x 3 x 2) is comparable to a 1300cc 2-stroke and a 2600cc 4-stroke engine.
@@nilslindqvist7472 that's what I said in lay man's terms, but the rotary , well as is the standard you don't count only the firing cylinders , yes if you counted the rotary the way you should it fires 650 cc every rev X 2 X 2, but the way the companies do it they are only counting one side of the triangle so 650 + 650 = 1300. But like I said if we counted a 5 litre 4 stroke V8 that way on firing impulses it's also 1300 or 1250. As only 2 cylinders fire in one rev. Simply a 500 cc two stroke in the same 2 revs as a four stroke is 1000 cc total firing energy, 500 cc four stroke is 500cc firing energy , the rotary is 2600cc ! But counting chamber volume as they do in a 5 litre V8 they count all the cylinders , 13b has six 650cc chambers so 3.9 litres , don't matter how many revs it takes , or we would call that V8 a 2.5 litre . As it takes 2 revs to complete all . A double acting two stroke ( or one stroke ) ship engine fires every half revolution. So one cylinder on that engine goes through 4 cycles of piston displacement in one rev . So say it was 500cc it's 500 x4 or 2 litres .
The extra power pu;lse exp[anation is incorrect. Each engine produces the torque from 1000cc. The five cylinder Honda engine can rev to a higher rpm, thereby producing more POWER.
The rc211v was the finest MotoGP bike ever produced.
HONDA; Had One once, Never Do it Again....
Bring back the blue-smokers
I own an ST1300 V4. Incredible bike. A touring bike that is also a crotch rocket.
In the 60's Honda produced more power by adding cylinders to their bikes.
Does any street bike uses V5?
No
@@bigtitmaster :-(
Another power pulse is not the full advantage (if any advantage at all). More and smaller pistons do two things: More valve area that give more air in and more power out. Smaller pistons also means shorter strokes and higher revs, again creating more power. This is something Honda had done before with their 5 and 6 cylinder 4 stroke engines in the 60's.
The rulebook for the start of the 4 stroke erea was largely dictated by the most influenceable manufacturer, Honda. They had their 5 cyl engine on the drawing board before the rules were set and sneaked in a very important rule; No weight penalty for 5 vs 4 cylinders. (up to this point there were a weight penalty for each added cylinder). I think that went under the radar because who would be mad enough to make an Inline 5 and a V5 was almost unheard of. The engine were a ganious construction but they had this planned and pushed those rules according to the plan.
Nice presentation but you missed the main reason why Moto GP went 4 stroke. 2 strokes are less efficient and more polluting, not achieving a full burn of the fuel air mixture before expelling some of the unburnt fuel it of the exhaust port. 4 strokes achieve a much higher burn rate of pretty much %100. This means that two fold if Moto GP went 4 stroke it would be a cleaner sport, but more importantly 2 strokes were being ruled out of manufacture for the road by emissions regs. So the manufacturers wanted to race 4 strokes like the 4 strokes they were building for the road.
It's really about that last point, I doubt they gave 2 figs about the emissions.
@@memitim171 Ironic that DI 2 Strokes are more efficient and cleaner than 4 strokes but here we are. Honda was the main driving force in migrating the sport away from 2 Strokes.
@@pierrebroccoli.9396 DI (statified charge ignition) engines aren't more clean than simple homogenous charge ignition engines (multipoint injection), let alone 2T bikes with unavoidable "valve" overlap. I agree with OP about rules being changed with environment in mind, not to meke racing bikes environment friendly, but to transfer experience gained in racing to production bikes.
@@laimonasmusauskas1153 The EPA with 2T DI engines would disagree when it comes to marine outboard engines for lake usage in the US.
Then again I have heard of Carb alterations for 4T engines getting 200 miles to the gal on a V8 back in the early 70's but that wasn't good for business.
What I do miss myself with the 2T is being on the Pipe. That and the light weight and simplicity of the engines. It resonated well with me and although you had to swap out the rings at regular intervals - it wasn't that complicated.
You simply couldn’t get anything else out of a 500cc two stroke …they hit the wall on development
Big two stroke race bikes are just too violent in their power delivery with tiny all or nothing power bands. Winning on one took geniuses like Rossi, Doohan, Rainey, Roberts.
...and Randy Mamola
Ironically if they had the electronics and tires like we do today they would be much easier to ride close to the limit.
….Gardner, Schwantz, Lawson, Spencer, Uncini, Lucchinelli, Sheene, Read, Agostini,…..
Honda online 6 has perfect primary and secondary balance, but it's way to wide. So if Honda could do a 3 cylinder side block, why don't they, or others make a V6 engine so it'll have again, both perfect primary and secondary as well? By his logic, it wouldn't be too big as was the issue with the inline 6.
I'm no expert on MotoGP so I could be a bit wrong in this but typically these sorts of things are driven by the rules. Teams could have made V6s but they would be given a higher minimum weight. Twins could run a lot lighter. 4s had to be heavier but not as heavy as the 6s. The V5 was allowed to run at the same weight as the 4s.
A V6 should be awesome
I wonder how that would feel in a road bike
Insane I imagine
i have a question, why didnt they create a v6 instead? i know the v5 worked out but im actually super curious why? is it something in the rules? or honda just want to do something crazy lol
The weight restrictions for a 4 cylinder and a 5 cylinder were the same in the 990 era. They would have had to run a heavier bike with a 6 cylinder.
Didn't VW also make a V5? Not sure why they did it.
Who was V4 in ‘02?
Suzuki GSV-R
Ducati also ran a V4, but didn't enter the series until 2003
I remember VW using a V5 I just read 1997-2005?..balance issue to solve there too and yet they still did it LOL WHY?? ?? Just for less parts? Anyone know here? Oh also Audio....which may have been basically same motors IDK Anyway Honda did not actually steal from Germans as I read the VW "V" was almost a straight 5...but it is a Vee because there is a 15 degree difference....so close they could still use ONE head for all cylinders! Meaning I imagine many did not even realise they were even looking at a Vee engine lol....WTH??
The Dream Engine!!!
It's still unbeatable
I might be a little off because I don't have the exact years , but didn't : Rossi , Burgess , and Yammee , throw your's and Honda's theories out with their evolutionary ( ha-ha ) inline 4 ,,, ?
I don't know much about MotoGP but I thought they can only use bikes that are in production , I don't think Honda sells the RC213
Moto GP is not a production based series. More like the F1 equivalent for motorcycles.
@@alexprymack7834 I thought the rules are they must use a stock platform
MotoGP is a prototype class
Can Honda beats Ducati down with this V-5 engine?
all of this was due to regulations weight limits were the same for 2 and 3 cylinders and for 4 and 5 cylinders
So why not a v6?
They would have had to run at a heavier weight with a 6 cylinder. 4 cylinder and 5 cylinder bikes were allowed to compete at the same weight.
How the mighty have fallen.
Comes around goes around. Stick around.
they wil be back again beliefe me
I don't think the engine is the problem on the Honda.
@@gbone7581 The lack of rear grip they keep complaining about could be an engine issue. They never got their engine working properly with the new regulations since 2016
@@mignik01 I doubt it is just one thing, if it was they would have figured it out by now!
Before we go into that, I want to tell the history of the world. Bye.
Some four cylinder 2-smokers for snogo's are making near 400 hp. Think about that.
400hp over the last 200 rpm? no thanks
@@seanbirtwistle649bro, they aint bmw touring bikes, nobody cares about the Power range in motogp
@@frederikbalz8978 no? put a 400hp 4 stroke against a 400hp 2 stroke and i bet you no one rides the 2 stroke
@@seanbirtwistle649 but in a race theres a max volume of the engine, and a 2 stroke makes more power
@@frederikbalz8978 power isn't everything in a race
A genius is a person, just saying......
I love your channel and nerding out about engines and racing.
Personal nitpick though: those huge flashing text overlays annoy me to no end.
I understand why you do it, but my god just show me the clips without flashing huge text over it. Or put it under at least.
Hope you don't mind the feedback 🙈
Do you have any metrics on how many people watch with sound off? Curious...
Feedback is good I take everything on board. It's done to try and emphasise a point but I'm keen to try other things :)
RIP 69
What happened to Hondas out of round piston engines?? I believe they were oval!!!???
outlawed in the regulations
So why for there stop usnh yhr V5? Man! That should've been an obvious thing to say at th nd.
Rules change in 2007 (pretty much) forced all manufacturers to 4 cylinders (with a maximum displacement of 800cc). Another rule change in 2012 also (pretty much) dictated 4 cylinder engines in the premier class.
So why did they stop using this fantastic V5 engine?
They changed the regulations to 4 cyl only IIRC
@@michelgarneau7693 I wonder what their justification was for this. Always the FIM seem to outlaw anything that makes the sport more interesting from a technical viewpoint.
@@eventcone As is the case with many such changes, I imagine it was for cost-cutting reasons (or to try to level the playing field for the smaller mfrs)
@@michelgarneau7693they make the Sport boring, i even watch sometimes old series because they are more interesting
@@michelgarneau7693 not initially. They reduced the displacement to 800cc in 2007. The biggest change was a 5 cylinder could no longer compete at the same weight as a 5 cylinder. 4 cylinders were not mandated until 2012 when they went to 1000cc.
No forgetting their 3 cylinder prototype.. Love the game footage 😂😂
The Fan-Boys did it again 🤷♂️
It's to bad Honda hasn't had a good rider since Nicky Hayden, in addition Honda has put allot into Formula1 the last 2 decades
Marc Marquez?
@@gbone7581 oh yeah that guy...6 time World Champ
How is a V5 "a different direction ENTIRELY" lol "entirely would be running a rotary or something not simply 5 rather than 4 cylinders.....just saying