It's an amazing sport but F1 to Moto GP is comparing apples and oranges. Moto GP ends up being much quicker in smaller laps with few straights, but F1 can have better lap times in tracks with massive straights since F1 cars have a higher top speed thanks to more sucking to the ground by the body and more friction through 2 more wheels. The top speed here was close to 190mph, but if this was F1 it probably would have been over 220 even though the turns would have been slower. It takes ridiculous amounts of talent to drive either of those at the professional level (and throughout this video I saw dozens of times where Ian was a hair from making a critical mistake). It's a different world with two wheels than it is with four.

There are also videos out there of F1 drivers doing incredible things - such as driving a sub 7 minute lap on Nurburgring while the track was coated in ice and snow.

I don't doubt it. Either is amazingly athletic too - old farts like me needn't apply. One is just more pants-wettingly scary for me.

Also, it seems F1 and endurance car racing focuses a bit more of the machine and team (at least during the race). The Audi R10 was so dominant at LeMans/Sebring that its now required to carry ballast. Motorcycle racing seems a bit more rider focused - no pit stops, and a Rossi can be just as dominant riding a Aprilia, Honda, or Yamaha.

there are pit stops at Isle of Man, for fuel and rear tire swap.

F1 drivers have to be more fit than motorcyclists, just because they have to take higher G forces, that are also horizontal unlike the vertical g's riders take.

Guys, they are both awesome. I like Rally better than anything, but I still think both F1 and TT are incredible and awesome and I'll watch them any time.

at least we can all agree nascar sucks, especially after seeing how they have to have their circle blow-dried to 'race' on it.

If I could give you my stars, I would.

Working on one right now.