After years of debate we have a winner
 

Are cars quicker than bikes?

I'd beat both them times:D

Obviously the bike would win there. It's hard to compare really, for instance I reckon a WRC car fair a lot better.

Hmm, I think a bike is always going to take it there. The roads are narrow so suit bikes.

But you can't buy a WRC car.... not the latest version anyway. The superstock lap record is just over 130MPH. (that was a bike you can buy in a showroom for 10k. You can fit a new shock and a stronger chain.)

So this is a fairly unique chance to compare the stuff we can actually buy, running in the spec that we can buy it in. Funny thing is, a bike costing 10k is on average 19MPH quicker than a car costing ... what 30k? For the superbike race, there are a few bikes there that cost in excess of 250k, and the superbikes are nearly 2 MPH quicker than the 10k bikes

WRC car would get stuffed.

Not enough top speed.

Be intersted to see how an RA-R or one of the Litchfield models would fare in this one. Believe the STi was almost standard...........

It wouldn't be 2 and a half mins quicker. Get over it.

A WRC car would have no chance due to the lack of top speed that someone has already pointed out.

A better comparison would be an F1 car v the equivelant TT seniors bike, the F1 car would probably fall to bits though with all the bumps and jumps.

To be fairer.

The Subaru can be compared to a 12 year old 70 bhp 250 2 stroke.....not much quicker than a 40bhp 125!

Well I'd put money on a current spec WRC car anyday ( which you can buy ;) ), gearing can be adjusted to give higher top speed, massive grip levels. Put Mark Higgins in the drivers seat... sorted :thumb:

Really? I don't think there are bumps as big as the kerbs on F1 tracks (the humpback bridge aside).

Yep - same as the superstock

And look at the state of Vitaly Petrov's F1 car when he tried to take one of those kerbs at speed, it smashed the steering column instantly.

Their is a huge difference between lightly skimming kerbs on an F1 track compared to what the car would face on those main roads on the Isle Of Man.

On the basis that you really can't buy either one.... hows that better :confused:

Lightly skimming? have you seen how many kerbs get hit by F1 cars? That same kerb was hit by F1 cars thousands of times that weekend yet how many cars did the above?

Ohhhh Lets have a massive bet on this. You buy a version of this years leading WRC car for 700k and I will buy a version of the Kwacker that won the production race..... for under 10k. You can put whoever you want in the seat. Given a chance like this, I'm riding it myself.

BTW - Loser pay the course fees.

Both can hit 200mph, both accelerate similar. The F1 car would slaughter the bike in a straight line obviously but around the twists on the Isle Of Man i'd put everything i owned on the equivelant TT bike beating the F1 car round the TT circuit.

An F1 car v a TT bike is a more even comparison than an Impreza of any type taking on a TT bike, thats the point i was making where you would have a better contest and comparison in speed and power .... Not cost.

Last time you saw an F1 car airborne on purpose?

What point don't you get ? The F1 car would have nothing to skim on the Isle Of Man TT course, all the bumps and jumps it would be hitting head on just like when Petrov tried to take one of the kerbs head on at speed and his steering column smashed.

F1 cars are designed to skim kerbs as thats obvious, they arn't designed though to hit large bumps and jumps head on at speed just like it would have to do at the Isle Of Man TT course.

But an F1 car would slaughter any bike on a smooth track with fast corners.

I was comparing a Scoob you can buy against a bike you can buy. The bottom of the post shows the insanity of the superbikes. Most of us could afford either the Scoob or the kwacker. I would bet that there aren't too many who could afford the front discs of a superbike or an F1 car

The car wasn't simply riding a bump, it was off road and rejoining when it hit the kerb full on. My point is that when the F1 cars are driving round circuits they quite often hit bumps that will lift wheels off the ground ie kerbs. If we're going to try to compare like for like, then what would happen if you went offroad at the TT and hit a kerb in the way Petrov did?:lol1:

Your points are fair enough, on the TT course though you arn't goint to get very many smooth, fast corners.

John McGuiness has come back in blood splattered leathers from birds being on the road and spooking at the last second and hitting him and his bike, imagine those being sent down the cooling pods on an F1 car.

You be dead, but you would have been quicker than Petrov. So what you are saying....... that a quick biker is quicker that a quick driver, even though the biker knows that if he farts at the wrong time he will probably be dead???? Why do racers even bother with cars....... unless they are a bit ckicken?

Answer is no

I'm not confessing to be right or wrong until it is tested, but what I can't agree with however is that Rob thinks an F1 car will come apart on the TT circuit due to bumps, if the bumps are that bad that it would do that then it would be no advantage whatsoever to a biker. My point was look at how hard the F1 car hits bumps/kerbs on a circuit over a race weekend including 60-70 laps! Is he trying to tell me that an f1 car would be that high off the ground regularly?

Previous record was held by a Rover 827.

Can I just step in here and say ..."wut the fuuuu...." :cuckoo:

Seriously, there had to be something better than that to razz round the island in, even an 820 turbo would have been better.

All the bikers already know that :D

No, i never mentioned anything about an F1 car would be off the ground constantly. The TT course is 37 miles long, it would be virtually bone shaking from start to finish in an F1 car for the driver. The car would have to be raised which reduces its aerodynamics which would then give it less down force, it would have to reduce its speed in a lot of places to keep it on the track due to how bumpy main roads are because otherwise it would be constantly bouncing and losing grip and traction.

They get suspensions loaded up in a certain direction based on several million pounds worth of simulation. The guy on the bike gets airborne based on how hard or late he had the balls to brake. I've stood a Ballaugh and watch people recover from missing the brake point and being 8 feet in the air, completely cranked over just to make the very slight turn after the bridge. It usually looks like Webber going flying last year