Still on the bike v car thing.
I have a 330 ps Scoob and a standard 954 Blade ( apart from the race can )

Other than a shortish motorway run, where the bike would see off the car, I think that on any type of road I would get from A to B quicker in the car, traffic etc permitting, mainly down to the cornering ability of the car.

Got to say I have much more fun on the bike though.

Ok this is how i see it. only the very fastest cars will keep with a superbike in a straight line i.e. Veyron (i think thats how you spell it) Arial Atoms and the like. however once a bike has to string a series of bends together then its not as clear cut - throw in some crappy road surfaces and the advantage clearly swings in the favour of a modified Scoob/Evo etc.

I have taken over sportsbikes in s*** conditions in my mildy modded Classic - come a straight line however and they bugger off so quick its embarrassing - i wont even try to keep up!:brickwall

It's been tested a number of times on Top Gear.

Bikes are always quicker than cars in a straight line. BUT put a very good superbike against a top car around a circuit and the car prevails.

I'll try to get in before the trolls arrive...

I'm a far better rider than driver, but over a distance on roads I will almost certainly be quicker in my M5 than on the GSX-R. Traffic, obviously, changes the game completely but it's just so much easier sustaining high speeds in the car. Plus I have something like three times the tank range and, though obviously it takes longer to fill, the total lost time is less.

But.

The bike makes overtaking a breeze. If there's stationary traffic then the bike is (obviously) way quicker and once I've got to the destination parking a bike is usually much easier. And free.

Downside is the need to get changed into and out of bike gear at each end (add five minutes to the journey time) and the occasional failure of my patented suit carrying method so I arrive looking like I've slept in it...

Going into the office in town (Westminster area) I save about 45 minutes overall at peak travel time going by bike. If I stay South of the river that drops to half an hour or so. Today I drove in because I'm out of town and I have 2 colleagues with me. Reckon it took me about half an hour longer than usual, but coming home will add at least 90 minutes because of the M25 :(

Edited to add that on the track, pretty well any track, under pretty well any circumstances (except rain and other slippery stuff) I'm waaay faster on the bike. But that's because I'm a better rider than driver. And because I've never really raced cars, while I raced bikes for some time...

SB

Wise words indeed from SB. Traffic is the killer, unpredictable factor.

On many of the A-roads round here (Cheshire) all it takes is one wagon or a couple of nose-to-tail cars and overtaking in ANY car is risky / dangerous, irrespective of BHP, because there are very short straights, blind corners and high hedges.

Whereas even on my lowly 70s 2 stroke I can overtake with ease because I have so much better visibility of the road & oncoming traffic, and pretty good acceleration up to 80+.

Can I use the term "real world conditions"? Can I? Can I? :D

I am a Mon - Fri commuter and do not use my bike for pleasure but to cut through traffic on my horrendous journey to work.
If my journey was traffic free I'd choose a car, much safer, and I can listen to the radio :)
I hate this 32c weather, my leather jacket almost melted on my back last night and the missus had to peel it off me :D

Most production cars are a huge compromise, which can be reduced by throwing huge amounts of money at them, sports bikes are made to go like the wind and that’s that.

Sports bikes now are lapping quicker than GP machines of a decade ago.

Engine/Chassis/suspension/brake/tyres are all pretty much state of the art and in general you don’t need to start throwing ££££££’s at them for fast road/track work

For a car to beat a bike on the track, it has to be a “proper” track day weapon , not a bolt on STi or “M” spoiler IE your Radicals etc…such a car doesn’t come with the options like aircon/airbags or maybe even ignition key for that matter and certainly isn’t made by Subaru.

Sure that space frame thingy top gear tested beat the bike but of all the tests ive seen and read the car is miles faster than your average sports car cos there too soft and heavy. From memory I think the time the bike made would have put it 3rd or 4th from the top on that particular chart and it was a bog standard CBR600.

Someone mentioned in the other thread that all the cars in the test out braked the Gixxer thou in the 0-100-0 test, which I don’t doubt. However I bet if that test was repeated a few times the clutches, drive train and brakes will have melted to mush on half the cars with numerous messages on the dash asking you to go to the main dealer. I tried a similar test with my mate who has an M5; we had to call a halt to it when smoke poured from all 4 callipers, it couldn’t handle the repeated high speed braking.

isnt this the most pointless comparison possible...bike V car on the road?

the difference between the winner and looser will NEVER be because of the speed that either can travel at....it will always depend on how much of the real world you include.

include getting your leathers on and i'll win on my skateboard because i'll have left 45mins before the bike

include traffic and no car will beat a pizza delivery moped let alone a sports bike.

the only place it can be tested is on a track where no car designed for road use will get close to a fast bike designed for road use.

If we are all driving to the "limit point" or "vanishing point", whatever you want to call it, then we should all be going round the corners at the same speed.

no, because what is a corner to a car may be a straight line to a bike, a roundabout is a perfect example. there are a few on a road near me (fast A road) that i could take on my R1 with nothing more than a flick, a car woud have to slow.

Maybe a 'dead-heat'............?



http://img313.imageshack.us/img313/3954/bike1qo4mm.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

SLOW DOWN OT THIS MAY BE YOU................................

It's been tested a number of times on Top Gear.

Bikes are always quicker than cars in a straight line. BUT put a very good superbike against a top car around a circuit and the car prevails.

Top gear being a car show with a presenter that hates motorbikes? Hardly going to let the bike win. I saw the comparison they did and it was clearly a set up as are all their comparisons. Cars are much easier to drive faster than bikes are to ride, without traffic I would definately arrive quicker in my car than on the R6, but it wouldn't be as much fun.

the only place it can be tested is on a track where no car designed for road use will get close to a fast bike designed for road use.

:nono: Ducati 999 vs Gallardo round Anglesey .44 of a second in it i'd call that pretty close http://www.metacafe.com/watch/88786/lamborghini_vs_ducati/

Top gear being a car show with a presenter that hates motorbikes? Hardly going to let the bike win. I saw the comparison they did and it was clearly a set up as are all their comparisons. Cars are much easier to drive faster than bikes are to ride, without traffic I would definately arrive quicker in my car than on the R6, but it wouldn't be as much fun.

Agree totally.
Anyone can drive a car relatively quickly.
Put them on a bike and it's bottle.

I'm no racing driver but have have had a few track days on both bikes and cars.
A mate of mine rides a bike and in a car he is just as quick(slow) as me round the track.
Get the bikes out and I can, and have lapped him in a 20 min track session.

I have a modded scoob STI. 327 bhp. Can't come close to the Busa on acccelaration. Cornering, I would leave the Busa, but on the next straight the Busa would just cream past. Nothing like a big bike.

:)

:nono: Ducati 999 vs Gallardo round Anglesey .44 of a second in it i'd call that pretty close http://www.metacafe.com/watch/88786/lamborghini_vs_ducati/

yeah, now lets try it at a long fast track........ :thumb:

and yes I am a biker if you havent read any of my other posts

so many variables...... so what, each have their own place in my heart and thats all that matters... only 1 way... Do Both :D

:nono: Ducati 999 vs Gallardo round Anglesey .44 of a second in it i'd call that pretty close http://www.metacafe.com/watch/88786/lamborghini_vs_ducati/


so a zillion £ car and a poxy little track for go karts and the bike still wins!

so a zillion £ car and a poxy little track for go karts and the bike still wins!

but it was never the less designed for road use which was what was being questioned not price tag ;)

... only 1 way... Do Both :D

Oh yeah, that is the truth! :thumb:


Mike. :)

but it was never the less designed for road use which was what was being questioned not price tag ;)


fair point.....but lets assume that zillon pound car + go kart track = close but still not as fast as a bike. we can now assume anything less in regards of car value or better in regards of track and the bike will pull a much better margin!

bottom line is if you took all the bikes owned on SN, all the cars owned on SN and all the tracks in the UK......then selected a random one from each group - I would give 1000/1 on your random car beating your random bike at a random track :D

fair point.....but lets assume that zillon pound car + go kart track = close but still not as fast as a bike. we can now assume anything less in regards of car value or better in regards of track and the bike will pull a much better margin!

bottom line is if you took all the bikes owned on SN, all the cars owned on SN and all the tracks in the UK......then selected a random one from each group - I would give 1000/1 on your random car beating your random bike at a random track :D

possibly so, i'm not biker but i would presume it is easier to take a car to its limits than a bike, still as long as we enjoy our motoring bikers and drivers can co-habit our roads :D

possibly so, i'm not biker but i would presume it is easier to take a car to its limits than a bike, still as long as we enjoy our motoring bikers and drivers can co-habit our roads :D

Amen to that!

SB

Amen to that!

SB

Thank you


<<steps off soap box>> :D

I'll try to get in before the trolls arrive...

I'm a far better rider than driver, but over a distance on roads I will almost certainly be quicker in my M5 than on the GSX-R. Traffic, obviously, changes the game completely but it's just so much easier sustaining high speeds in the car. Plus I have something like three times the tank range and, though obviously it takes longer to fill, the total lost time is less.

But.

The bike makes overtaking a breeze. If there's stationary traffic then the bike is (obviously) way quicker and once I've got to the destination parking a bike is usually much easier. And free.

Downside is the need to get changed into and out of bike gear at each end (add five minutes to the journey time) and the occasional failure of my patented suit carrying method so I arrive looking like I've slept in it...

Going into the office in town (Westminster area) I save about 45 minutes overall at peak travel time going by bike. If I stay South of the river that drops to half an hour or so. Today I drove in because I'm out of town and I have 2 colleagues with me. Reckon it took me about half an hour longer than usual, but coming home will add at least 90 minutes because of the M25 :(

Edited to add that on the track, pretty well any track, under pretty well any circumstances (except rain and other slippery stuff) I'm waaay faster on the bike. But that's because I'm a better rider than driver. And because I've never really raced cars, while I raced bikes for some time...

SB

Most informed and unbiased post I've ever read in this forum :notworthy

Most production cars are a huge compromise, which can be reduced by throwing huge amounts of money at them, sports bikes are made to go like the wind and that’s that.

Sports bikes now are lapping quicker than GP machines of a decade ago.

Engine/Chassis/suspension/brake/tyres are all pretty much state of the art and in general you don’t need to start throwing ££££££’s at them for fast road/track work

For a car to beat a bike on the track, it has to be a “proper” track day weapon , not a bolt on STi or “M” spoiler IE your Radicals etc…such a car doesn’t come with the options like aircon/airbags or maybe even ignition key for that matter and certainly isn’t made by Subaru.

Sure that space frame thingy top gear tested beat the bike but of all the tests ive seen and read the car is miles faster than your average sports car cos there too soft and heavy. From memory I think the time the bike made would have put it 3rd or 4th from the top on that particular chart and it was a bog standard CBR600.

Someone mentioned in the other thread that all the cars in the test out braked the Gixxer thou in the 0-100-0 test, which I don’t doubt. However I bet if that test was repeated a few times the clutches, drive train and brakes will have melted to mush on half the cars with numerous messages on the dash asking you to go to the main dealer. I tried a similar test with my mate who has an M5; we had to call a halt to it when smoke poured from all 4 callipers, it couldn’t handle the repeated high speed braking.

And again, more real world experience V wanaabee forum dick shakers :luxhello:

Good post m8 :thumb:

Schumacher in a Ferrari would leave pretty much anyone on scoobynet in the same Ferrari for dead in the corners, too, though - it's not the Ferrari that makes the difference, it's the arogant git with the big talent. The point is that ultimate pace on a track is much more related to driver / rider ability than what you're driving / riding

There are three areas that saloon cars like the scoob win out. One is that they are easier to drive at say 90% of their potential pace than a sports bike is to ride at 90% of it's potential pace; hence people can get closer to the limits in them. Secondly, in unpredictable road conditions where there might be e.g. a diesel spill that will just unsettle a car going round a corner at 80%, you'd almost certainly fall off a bike on the same corner at 80%. Finally, in really fould weather (e.g. snow) - where would you rather be?

For overtaking on A or B roads, or going through heavy traffic, there is just no contest, a decent bike wins by a huge distance every time even against stupid fast cars. For drag races against all but the fastest cars, a good sports bike wins easily every time.

On a track, with equally good driver/rider, well sorted radicals, caterhams etc will often be a little faster than fast bikes. The faster bikes will generally be faster than traditional supercars (Porsches, Ferrari, Lambo's etc) or saloon cars.

Nothing much novel above, just seems that most people always say "cars are better" or "bikes are better" when the reality is that both are much better than the other in certain circumstances.

i have a foot in both camps here and will despense my 2 cents on this topic.a crescnt suzuki prepped busa engined radical got beat by a slightly modified gsxr 1000 around silverstone.those top gear matches are all gerared for the cars to win, a lot of it comes down to the track chossen.saloon cars are a lot slower than bikes on any DRY track this i know by comparing my own lap times.At the end of the day for me its all about the adrenalin hit which imo can only be got on bikes.each to there own and all that.happy motoring:)

Still on the bike v car thing.
I have a 330 ps Scoob and a standard 954 Blade ( apart from the race can )

Other than a shortish motorway run, where the bike would see off the car, I think that on any type of road I would get from A to B quicker in the car, traffic etc permitting, mainly down to the cornering ability of the car.

Got to say I have much more fun on the bike though.

Interestingly you haven't actually asked a question. You have stated that you would be faster in your car (suchandsuch) and that the bike is more fun.

Personally I can't think of any journey under say a hundred miles where I wouldn't arrive sooner on a bike. Certainly, in and around London, I make routine trips which might take 20 minutes on the bike vs. a couple of hours in the car.

On the other hand the last time I took an iMac with me on the bike I did my back in, I can only take one passenger at a time (if they have a helmet) and if it rains I get wet. In the car, I can scare the life out of four people at a time (five including me) and happily pop up to Scotchland without the need to write a book about it.

So which is faster? The White Cliffs of Dover or a lump of mature Stilton?

Screwd.

Ok here goes flame siut ready... ;-)
i've had an old GSXR 750, very quick bick though, but it was a long while ago now... And a new Sti last year, and now i've an Atom 300 and here's what i think... I used to think the bike was untouchable ANYWHERE, and i could ride it, before all the stoppies and other trick became popular i was well happy doing 1/2 mile back wheel stuff and knee down when possible so i was a confident rider that's all i'm trying to put across...
Perspective chaned when i got the Sti, and i though it was very quick especially over your average UK road... 13 dead quarter made it reasonable in a straight line too...
Now i've got the Atom 300 and beleive me its is quick as a the biggest bike, quicker to 60 and only slightly slower to 100 maybe 1/2-3/4 second, but i can get on the power instantly and have MUCH MUCH more grip...
around corners the Atom is mush quicker even with the best rider.. simple... i was following a guy last weekend around a huge roundabout, who waved me to have a go and gave the thumbs up, followed at a safe distance and he was fully cracked over and credit due was knee to floor at a very decent angle...
fact is i could have driven right around the outside ALOT faster, the Atom wasn't even being pushed... A two year old R1 it was and launching onto the straight there was nothing in it, i got on the gas a bit early and down the shortish striaght i'd say it was evens...
Now the problem is i know how quick the Atom goes down my fav b roads and i can honestly say my Sti was way quicker... it's scary in the Atom, as it is on a big bike, Scoobadishies just eat those kind of roads, the Scoob would eat a 440k Enzo down most UK roads other than smooth twisty bits... and it will do the same to a bike...
the Atom is as quick as a bike from the lights, and alot quicker round the bends, but on a bumpyish road the Atom and bike would be left by a Scoobadishie, it simply down to what there designed for...
anyhow my two penneth...

Daz

Here's the atom vs a traveling TVR, and he was trying... just to give some idea...
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7704419887701957271&q=ariel+atom

old tvr ;)

atoms are great though - but personally I'd prefer something with a few more panels like an Exige etc....

Yeah I thought about getting myself an Atom.

Then I realised I'd never have anything like enough money...

You say you could have driven around him but there's the rub - you actually couldn't because it would be too dangerous. Same thing with motorway, dual carriageways etc., unless you can really **** off into the distance, a car, any car, just isn't manoeuverable enough at close quarters to race with a bike.

So rather than fantasise about racing car/bikes on the road, it becomes a more ordinary debate about boring a to b stuff. Then of course you can't just say "ignoring traffic" because in the real world there's so much of it!

The great thing about jumping on a bike is you can pretty much guarantee what time you'll arrive at your destination, irrespective of traffic.

So long as you don't die...

Screwd.