This came up at work and need help with this dispute.
What is faster on a straight, a Formula 1 car or a AMA Superbike?
(say that Michael Schummacher raced Nicky Hayden)

Does anyone have specs on these two? Is there a web-page that I can go to that tells the specs on either one of them?

I know that the Formula 1 car is faster on tracks where they dominate on the turns, but on all out acceleration, can a formula 1 take a AMA Superbike?

I said that the Formula 1 cars are faster, and 3 guys at work that don't know much at all about F1 says the bike is faster.

I love bikes and have great appreciation for those 2 wheel gods, and I know that they are lightning quick, but I truly believe that the F1 is the faster of the two.

 

I really don't see the point in the argument. I have a great appreciation for both means in racing, but side by side comparisons of the two? I'll let someone else battle that one out.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Schatten
[B]I really don't see the point in the argument.

 

The main question is how long will the straight be? bikes accelerate approx. 0-60 in less than 3 sec and that's pure stock nowadays (even 600's are under 3 sec). Formula cars accelerate a bit faster I think (they DO use jetfuel!!)...I think I heard a commentator say they do 0-100 in like 4 sec? that's DAMN fast! Also, ama superbikes max out under 200mph, where formula cars can exceed this. The bottom line is this: if it's a SHORT straight, might be close. If it's a long straight (over 1/4 mile), I'd put my money on the formula car. I LOVE bikes and they're fast as SH*T, but not fast compared to some cars out there, formula ones especially.

Just my opinion...I have no numbers to prove it. Hope this helps with your boys!

 

any idea on just how much hp a AMA or SBK Bike have? What is the power to weight ratio?

nHobbes, I completely agree with your post. Anyone else care to chime in with info?

 

An F1 car is around 1100 lbs and has around 800HP.
The Moto GP(new 4stroke gp bikes) are 300lbs+- and have around 200HP.
It is all about contact patch. Where the rubber meets the road. The F1 car has much wider tires and doesn't wheelie well. The bike has a contact patch of about 2inches and wheelies real well.
The F1 car is faster in every category.

I am sorry if my numbers above a not that accurate but you can look up all this stuff on the net. But I think I am fairly close.

 

The width of the tire is irrelevant in determining the area of the contact patch; the area of the patch is the weight borne by the wheel divided by the air pressure in the tire. (Sure, the width will matter if the tire goes completely flat, but for practical purposes it doesn't matter.) If you want a bigger contact patch, lower the air pressure.

Will this improve your acceleration? Probably not much, because as the area of the contact patch increases the pressure the tire exerts on the ground decreases (it's the same as the tire pressure).

To improve the acceleration, you need to increase the (effective) coefficient of friction. The two obvious ways to do this are to use stickier compounds for the tires (or, analogously, make the ground stickier), and to increase the effective weight of the vehicle--i.e., add aerodynamic downforce.

Whether the vehicle can wheelie only matters insofar as it increases the frontal cross-section and thereby increases the air resistance (or, similarly, defeats the design of the aero-downforce devices). It doesn't matter per se whether the front tires are on the ground or not if they're not providing any drive force.

Finally, horsepower isn't what accelerates you. Torque is.

 

Check this and see for yourself:

YZF-R7 vs Williams-BMW F1 car

Btw, I think F1 cars run on regular race fuel 110 octane I think. Heard this last season from one of the commentators.

 

SuperBike is but, my favorite is F1 by far

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by reecespieces
[B]Check this and see for yourself:

YZF-R7 vs Williams-BMW F1 car

Btw, I think F1 cars run on regular race fuel 110 octane I think.