Dilemma....
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by gaddafi,Mar 30 2006, 12:17 AM
I know that many bikes brake very well
My comments were based on the fact that it's not as easy for a biker to keep braking from very high speeds as it is for a driver and that there are more risks which might disincline them so to do
same as going fast in the wet and/or maintaining very high speeds, where a sane biker's interest in the road surface is compromised
the whole thing is more visceral, whereas you can drive something like my car at 8/10ths of it's potential (ie bloody fast) in relative serenity and with minimal effort
But I still don't make a fool of myself trying to race them
My comments were based on the fact that it's not as easy for a biker to keep braking from very high speeds as it is for a driver and that there are more risks which might disincline them so to do
same as going fast in the wet and/or maintaining very high speeds, where a sane biker's interest in the road surface is compromised
the whole thing is more visceral, whereas you can drive something like my car at 8/10ths of it's potential (ie bloody fast) in relative serenity and with minimal effort
But I still don't make a fool of myself trying to race them
Taking supercars and plastic bathtubs out of the equation...
[I]Caterham's R500 Evolution took the crown at Autocar's recent 0-100-0 test.
The competition which took place at Bruntingthorpe Proving Ground in Leicestershire saw the Caterham sprint to 100mph and then brake to a halt in just 10.73 seconds. This beat last year's best time set by the road going GT car, the Mosler MT900S.
Autocar's timing shows that the R500 reached 30mph in 1.45 seconds, 60mph in 3.21 seconds and 100mph in 6.92 seconds. Stopping from 100mph took just 3.6 seconds!
Almost as impressive was the sizeable Ferrari Enzo. It may cost
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 39,548
Likes: 11
From: City Of London / Knebworth
Originally Posted by reg,Mar 30 2006, 01:33 PM
For comparison, a Suzuki GSX-R also took part, reaching 100mph in 5.03 seconds but braking to a halt extended the time to 10.89.[/i]
The *old* R1 could do this in 9.4s. I am sure the current one could do it a bit quicker.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by StevenM,Mar 30 2006, 06:39 AM
The *old* R1 could do this in 9.4s. I am sure the current one could do it a bit quicker.
Banned
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 31,739
Likes: 69
From: Survivalist enclave
Originally Posted by reg,Mar 30 2006, 01:33 PM
<who thinks it would be funny to take a 125 to Donny and ride around the outside of Ego's in S's
I think that it would irritate me having to concern myself with getting too close to a bike compared to the consequences of contact with another car
not gonna happen anyway, because tracks don't really interest me
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,104
Likes: 0
From: Notts & Bristol wanderer
Er, the old bike v car debate...
Not in any doubt that bikes are quicker straight line...
But you're completely ignoring the laws of physics when it comes to cornering. Cars of middling ability can frequently go quicker round bends than even the best bikes because they have four points of contact with the road instead of two.
Witness the old Clarkson video where a 996 Carrera 2 is quicker round Thruxton (a very fast circuit which you would think would suit a bike) than some top of the range bike (can't remember the model, you may have guessed I'm not a huge bike fan), even if the ending of that contest was a BIT suspicious...
Witness also all these internet videos of people lapping the 'Ring, and through all of the twisty stuff these cars are overtaking really fast bikes, quite easily.
I've seen bikes on track and they do go quickly between the corners (amazing acceleration out of a bend, of course) but cars can usually close up under braking and cornering. I don't deny that bikes are very quick vehicles, but surely we're not now suggesting that they can corner quicker than some of the better track-sorted cars?
Anyway, back on topic
Not in any doubt that bikes are quicker straight line...
But you're completely ignoring the laws of physics when it comes to cornering. Cars of middling ability can frequently go quicker round bends than even the best bikes because they have four points of contact with the road instead of two.
Witness the old Clarkson video where a 996 Carrera 2 is quicker round Thruxton (a very fast circuit which you would think would suit a bike) than some top of the range bike (can't remember the model, you may have guessed I'm not a huge bike fan
), even if the ending of that contest was a BIT suspicious...Witness also all these internet videos of people lapping the 'Ring, and through all of the twisty stuff these cars are overtaking really fast bikes, quite easily.
I've seen bikes on track and they do go quickly between the corners (amazing acceleration out of a bend, of course) but cars can usually close up under braking and cornering. I don't deny that bikes are very quick vehicles, but surely we're not now suggesting that they can corner quicker than some of the better track-sorted cars?
Anyway, back on topic
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 39,548
Likes: 11
From: City Of London / Knebworth
Originally Posted by matthehat17,Mar 30 2006, 03:35 PM
I don't deny that bikes are very quick vehicles, but surely we're not now suggesting that they can corner quicker than some of the better track-sorted cars?
If you want to compare like with like, that is
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,104
Likes: 0
From: Notts & Bristol wanderer
Originally Posted by StevenM,Mar 30 2006, 03:43 PM
Track sorted bikes can corner very quickly too .....
If you want to compare like with like, that is
If you want to compare like with like, that is
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
From: Birmingham
[QUOTE=bigbadben,Mar 30 2006, 12:12 AM]Mark,
Before you part with the cash, you may find this a bit of an eye-opener!!
Before you part with the cash, you may find this a bit of an eye-opener!!