Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > World Superbike

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-02-2001, 02:06 AM   #31
MoMo
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 105
Default right on

right on minime. Hindle has proven himself on many occasions to be a major A-hole.
MoMo is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 05-02-2001, 02:11 AM   #32
Not_Anonymous_Squid
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 46
Default Re: World Superbike vs. Formula 1

Didn't the viper also wear out its (expensive) tyres very quickly?
Not_Anonymous_Squid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2001, 02:41 AM   #33
Copper
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 14
Default Re: World Superbike vs. Formula 1

The Viper Blew Up, actually.

Copper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2001, 03:43 AM   #34
Gixxerboy
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 166
Default Re: World Superbike vs. Formula 1

Don't forget that the road course (track) had sand blown all over it from near-by construction and that both the car and bike started the Angels Crest on cold tires. Car's tires warm up in moments whilst the bike's take far longer. Given different environmental , the results would have been different.

Cars are less subject to lowsiding (!) as their tire contact patch spans about 20 sq meters and a bikes about 20 sq cm's thus are less concerned about crap on the roads whilst a bike can loose it's precarious balance pretty easily.



THe other point is that the car was toast at the end. Not only did it blow it's engine but it's brakes were gone and the tires were toast.
Gixxerboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2001, 03:51 AM   #35
Gixxerboy
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 166
Default Re: World Superbike vs. Formula 1

We had this discussion before and one post (forget his name but gotta thank him for the link!!!) attached the following link. It's a vid of a Porsche 911 running 'round the nurmburgring (sp?) taken by the camera on the tank of a modified Yam R1 - I think the only bike mods were Ohlins suspension components and prob no mods to the car. The coolest thing is to see the bike shifting 'round 7k rpm whilst the 911 is running as hard as he can... when the bike gets tired of sitting around, he completely looses the car.

Now, I don't know the relative abilities of the driver/riders but this is a pretty good example of 'real road' comparisions.

Check it out - the vids are awesome



http://www.motorcycle-dk.com/en/multimedia/



Gixxerboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2001, 04:00 AM   #36
Arrow
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 45
Default Re: World Superbike vs. Formula 1

I remember an issue of Sport Bike back in 93-94 where they compared a CBR 900RR and an Acura NSX in Willow Springs. I can't recall the name of the driver now (think his last name was Parker), but he is a very talented person and races Indy Cars. Nick Ienatch rode the CBR and the bike was faster in the track by a considerable margin. The most interesting thing was that the car was only 1-2 mph faster through tightest chicanes.



As for the YZF1000 vs. Viper story, the YZF was not running well as it only posted a top speed of 154 or so mph. That may explain the 100-120 mph roll-on difference perhaps. A year or two ago, a German bike magazine (I think it was Motorrad) compared a Viper GTS and an R1 in Nurgburgring(did I spell that correctly?) and R1 defeated the Viper. Its results somewhat mirrored the Sport Bike test, the bike was faster and it was only 1-3 kph slower in tight turns. I don't know German so I decided not to buy the magazine, I wish I had!



British BIKE mag, compared a Subaru WSX with a four wheel drive 250-260 horsepower car (before anyone scoffs at this, consider that these cars outrun Porches, Ferraris in real world conditions) and an R1. The bike was faster again, and the car driver said that if the car driver tried to match the bikes speed on the street he would definitely land in jail! To make a point, the brand new tires on the car were finished in a couple of hundred of miles during the test yet the bike's had plenty of life left in them.



If the roads are good, a good ridden bike will take off. But if the conditions are bad (diesel, hydraulic spills, rain etc) then we have no chance. I own a 2000 ZX6R and a 2001 Ford Focus with ESP and I am amazed at the confidence I get from the car during slippery conditions. Still, the feeling can never match the satisfaction I get from my bike whenever I get a corner half-right. Bikes rule!!!

Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2001, 04:15 AM   #37
BBD_Racing
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 337
Default Re: Yeah, but when do you see...

There is this misguided impression that going fast on any racing machine is all about a crew building a machine and a pilot wringing it out. As if the machine "just gets built" by magical money-powered engineers without the pilot involved.



Sorry, ain't that way. The pilot's ability to be a "flight engineer" is crucial. Lots of people can go fast. To be a champion at F1 or GP takes someone who can ride fast, think, and be an engineer the whole while. Schumacher is paid his huge salary because he singlehandedly turned the Ferrari effort around. He did for Ferrari what Doohan did for HRC. The main difference being that engineering in a car is FAR more complex than a bike.



"Sitting in a chair." Geeze, I bet you'd say the same thing to aerobatic aviators.
BBD_Racing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2001, 04:17 AM   #38
la_picker
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2
Default Re: World Superbike vs. Formula 1

Hmmm..sounds like you guys have our interest all peaked for a car vs. bike shootout! You know..like best production sports car against the winner of the latest open-class bike shootout at one of the major tracks like Laguna Seca. If you issued an open challenge to the guys at car & driver magazine or a similar publication I'll bet that someone would pick up the gauntlet.
la_picker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2001, 04:20 AM   #39
das
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 237
Default Re: Real-world cars vs. real-world bikes

Having ridden a motorcycle on the track a few times, and having driven in a couple SCCA events, I have some amateur-only experience. My general take on cars vs. bikes on the track for average schmoes like me is that:



In the car, I'm within about 5-10% of the top SCCA guys in my class, lap-time-wise. On the bike, I'm not even within 30% of club racer lap times. So, my humble opinion is that, setting aside the super-high-end stuff like F-1 and GP bikes, riding a real-world bike fast requires much more skill than driving a real-world car fast. But, then again, maybe I'm just a lousy rider and/or a decent driver.



As for the street... friends and co-workers are usually confused when I tell them that I can drive my car (1993 Eagle Talon Turbo AWD) slightly faster through the twisties than I can ride my bike (1996 VFR). A lot of the reason is things like bad road surfaces, and the reality that there might be a deer standing in the middle of the road around the next corner. I haven't tried to calculate the relative weight-to-contact-patch ratios, but the bike wins power-to-weight hands down, of course. The fact is, though, that I can drive the car at it's traction and power limits with relative ease. Not so with the bike. Not even close.



So, I have a lot more respect for bike racers and their skills, than I do for most car racers.



Just my $0.02.

das is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2001, 04:27 AM   #40
BarryW
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3
Default Re: World Superbike vs. Formula 1

In lower forms of racing, bike riders are generally more fit and skilled. Many car racing series reward the ability to use your vehicle as a weapon against competitors whose courage to retaliate is often damped by the depth of their bank account. I don't consider that to be a valid driving skill. Bike racers, on the other hand, must respect the proximity of competing machinery lest they risk self-elimination. It's also common to see portly, gray haired, well funded 50-somethings as serious contenders in many forms of auto racing; not so in motorcycle roadracing. F1 is a different story and the top drivers are truly world-class athletes with the requisite genetics to do what few humans are capable of.



The distinction I've always made between top level bike and car drivers is the personal injury risk factor. Equipment failure, track hazards, and misjudgement all carry a heavier penalty on motorcycles. While learning their craft, car racers can spin out and run off track hundreds of times without incident. Each similar scenario for a bike racer in training and the consequent highside or body tumble, carries an immeasurably higher price. No top level bike racer gets there without already suffering permanent injuries and many of the best prospects never make it to the top for that reason alone. Even after whatever short career he manages to achieve, it's the exception rather than the rule that a bike racer gets to retire on his own terms. The norm is loss of physical ability as a result of injury, not the slow attrition of skill caused by the aging process. As someone observed above, compare the number of bike racers that retire to cars to the number of car racers that retire to bikes.



I'll always have more admiration for the bike racers because of the gymnastic precision and superhuman reflexes they possess, all exercised with the courage to face likely injury or worse as the penalty for any miscue.
BarryW is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off