Really fast cars v bikes?

[Randy Winkman]

wormus said:

Sadly, drive fast enough to win a race and you are often just as likely to get killed in a car.

And possibly kill others and smash up loads of stuff at the same time.

[RobM77]

xRIEx said:

RobM77 said:

but for under £20k you can buy an R500 now

Really? Got any links to ads?

They've risen a bit since I was looking at buying one a couple of years ago, but here's one for £22,750:

http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/c...

Obviously an R1 like the one used in the shootout is now a fifth of that price, but my point was that talking about Lambos and Ferraris is not really relevant to what most of us call fast (lap times), rather than a top speed most of us will never achieve or have any interest in (I have no idea what the top speed of either of my cars is!).

[T0MMY]

Biker's Nemesis said:

Except that the bike in the video was a Honda CBR 600RR from 2003 onwards.

Ah yes, so I wasn't riding that one hard but I was riding the ZX6R hard? Or presumably neither of them were ridden hard in your opinion hence your comment? I'm no Valentino Rossi but I've also never been told that lapping a bog standard 15 year old bike round Cadwell in the 1.44s the second time you've ever been there is "slow"

Stop being so bloody childish man...basically you're upset that you made a bit of a tit of yourself criticising my riding and evidently not expecting me to find the videos of your considerably slower riding.

[Motorrad]

T0MMY said:

Stop being so bloody childish man...basically you're upset that you made a bit of a tit of yourself criticising my riding and evidently not expecting me to find the videos of your considerably slower riding.

To be honest I'd prefer it if both of you stopped going on about your videos. It proves nothing and is little more than a willy waving contest. A little like this thread.

A better test of who has 'won' is which of you enjoyed it the most.

I'm expecting tales about getting off the bike with a grin you couldn't remove with pictorial evidence that one was wider or lasted longer than the other.

[T0MMY]

Motorrad said:

To be honest I'd prefer it if both of you stopped going on about your videos. It proves nothing and is little more than a willy waving contest. A little like this thread.

A better test of who has 'won' is which of you enjoyed it the most.

I'm expecting tales about getting off the bike with a grin you couldn't remove with pictorial evidence that one was wider or lasted longer than the other.

Woah there, I didn't post up my videos to show off, Biker's Stalker went and found them and posted one up to criticise me for some bizarre reason.

Now given that I quickly found his videos and they were amusingly slower, would you have not mentioned it? I didn't even link them, just pointed out that greenhouse dwellers shouldn't throw stones.

Anyway, I'm sure I was making valid points a while back in this thread but I can't even remember what about any more

[anonymous-user]

RobM77 said:

Something like a Caterham though is potentially faster in terms of lap times and way cheaper - still more expensive than a bike, but for under £20k you can buy an R500 now like the one Evo lapped Croft in a second or two faster than a quick rider (RIP Ronnie) on an R1. If you want track only, then a Formula Ford is even faster and even cheaper to run, and will lap most circuits in about the same time as a BSB bike.

A fast Caterham is a pussycat compared to a modern sports bike. Totally different appeal. Totally different level of commitment required. Sorry but anyone who says different doesn't really have the experience of both.

[T0MMY]

yonex said:

A fast Caterham is a pussycat compared to a modern sports bike. Totally different appeal. Totally different level of commitment required. Sorry but anyone who says different doesn't really have the experience of both.

Ah yes, that's what I was arguing about before.

Well I own both (sort of) and I disagree, sorry.

Just to wind this back, all the bikers are saying you get more feel and feedback from a bike...do you agree with that?

[RobM77]

yonex said:

RobM77 said:

Something like a Caterham though is potentially faster in terms of lap times and way cheaper - still more expensive than a bike, but for under £20k you can buy an R500 now like the one Evo lapped Croft in a second or two faster than a quick rider (RIP Ronnie) on an R1. If you want track only, then a Formula Ford is even faster and even cheaper to run, and will lap most circuits in about the same time as a BSB bike.

A fast Caterham is a pussycat compared to a modern sports bike. Totally different appeal. Totally different level of commitment required. Sorry but anyone who says different doesn't really have the experience of both.

Oh god, of course, yes I was just replying to the post about the pace of supercars compared to superbikes by saying that you can spend far more humble money on a car that'll give a bike a fun for its money (as I've done myself!). The whole point of a supercar, at least these days, is that they combine the pace with everyday comforts for regular road use.

[anonymous-user]

T0MMY said:

Ah yes, that's what I was arguing about before.

Well I own both (sort of) and I disagree, sorry.

Just to wind this back, all the bikers are saying you get more feel and feedback from a bike...do you agree with that?

I don't think drivers have the same issues, body position and minute shifts of weight don't make a crap of difference behind the wheel. Donnington in the wet sideways on the straights and wondering what sort of grip the front will allow, make a mistake and you're off. Make a mistake in the Caterham and you have chronic under steer into monstrous slides. Basically a 4 wheeled platform that doesn't fall over when you're not sitting in it is always going be less of a challenge. FWIW my 250 was massively more fun than the Caterham I had.

[T0MMY]

yonex said:

I don't think drivers have the same issues, body position and minute shifts of weight don't make a crap of difference behind the wheel. Donnington in the wet sideways on the straights and wondering what sort of grip the front will allow, make a mistake and you're off. Make a mistake in the Caterham and you have chronic under steer into monstrous slides. Basically a 4 wheeled platform that doesn't fall over when you're not sitting in it is always going be less of a challenge. FWIW my 250 was massively more fun than the Caterham I had.

Don't confuse the consequences of a mistake with the difficulty of avoiding making one though. I've only done a handful of car trackdays but I've done about a dozen bike ones. Unrecoverable mistakes are running at one a piece so evidently on average I've found it easier to overcook it in a car!

I suppose I could summarise my position by saying that in my opinion it is just as hard to find an extra half a second of laptime in a car as it is on a bike, once you are close to the limits of what you and your vehicle are capable of. As for which is more fun, well clearly that is a personal thing. I've been riding a lot longer than I've been driving so maybe it has less sheen...new-to-bikes bikers are always wildly enthusiastic after being in cars for years. I went the other way and I enjoy a good car just as much as a good bike.

Edited by T0MMY on Tuesday 21st October 18:06

[Motorrad]

T0MMY said:

Woah there, I didn't post up my videos to show off, Biker's Stalker went and found them and posted one up to criticise me for some bizarre reason.

Now given that I quickly found his videos and they were amusingly slower, would you have not mentioned it? I didn't even link them, just pointed out that greenhouse dwellers shouldn't throw stones.

Anyway, I'm sure I was making valid points a while back in this thread but I can't even remember what about any more

Do you think you enjoyed yourself is the salient point.

Given that you're both likely dog slow (although I'm sure faster than me) it really doesn't matter who did what time.

My take on this thread is that really fast bikes are a lot more fun and a lot more involving than really fast cars.

[anonymous-user]

Motorrad said:

My take on this thread is that really fast bikes are a lot more fun and a lot more involving than really fast cars.

This sums it up for me. I love cars and most things with engines but I really love bikes because of how they make me feel. A 125cc can be fun because it's like riding a fast pushbike without any real effort. A superbike is sort of the same but with a rocket strapped on and part of the appeal is vulnerability mixed with savage performance so you feel directly connected to the action. I've been riding for 20 years and now hate riding in winter but oddly still enjoy riding in the rain. On a hot sunny day somewhere like the IOM, there's no better way to get from A to B.

And I still maintain, on most UK roads in the dry there's no faster way to get from A/B. Not just because of top speed but power to weight over short distances, good visibility, size and agility. Cars cannot match these qualities.

[Hungrymc]

TOMMY, you seem to have a different experience to most people - fair enough.

I love both cars and bikes, I get great pleasure from both, I don't think one is 'better' than the other.

They are certainly a very different experiance though and I suspect that's what the bikers in particular are trying to describe. I can drive most cars on or around there limit. It may not be inch perfect, it won't be as precise and as fast as the more talented drivers, but I can certainly enjoy a car moving around a lot and get within a reasonable percentage of the faster drivers.

Not so on a bike, slides happen by accident when pushing on, and they're not 'enjoyable' the focus is on getting it back together (where as you can spend a huge portion of your time in a car driving in this zone). I fully understand that I'm not the fastest rider and there are guys out there much better than me.

Bikes for me have become about precision and accuracy (I will never have the skill to be drifting a bike out of corners regularly) - this seems odd as they are insane things, they're very 3 dimensional with lean angle and wheelies and loading the front forks - it sounds like a frenzy but you (well I) have to make it somehow calm and smooth.

Cars are about feeling the chassis moving around and balancing front and rear end slides. It's terrific fun.

Love em both, neither is better. Riding / driving at the highest level is equally skilled. For most of us mortals, extracting very high performance levels from a bike is particularly challenging mainly because it's much harder to learn to correct a sliding bike (except for back end on the brakes).

All the above is just my view and I appreciate it is different to yours.

[Mastodon2]

wormus said:

This sums it up for me. I love cars and most things with engines but I really love bikes because of how they make me feel. A 125cc can be fun because it's like riding a fast pushbike without any real effort. A superbike is sort of the same but with a rocket strapped on and part of the appeal is vulnerability mixed with savage performance so you feel directly connected to the action. I've been riding for 20 years and now hate riding in winter but oddly still enjoy riding in the rain. On a hot sunny day somewhere like the IOM, there's no better way to get from A to B.

And I still maintain, on most UK roads in the dry there's no faster way to get from A/B. Not just because of top speed but power to weight over short distances, good visibility, size and agility. Cars cannot match these qualities.

It's pointless trying to tell a car driver they could be having more fun on two wheels, they'll just tell you an F1 car is quicker around Silverstone.

[RobM77]

I think it depends what you enjoy doing and how you get your fun. Personally I get my fun from drifting around corners - speed doesn't do a lot for me, whereas driving on the limit does - that sort of fun is really the preserve of cars, unless you want a very short life! The sensations snd possibilities of bikes and cars really are quite different and it just depends what you enjoy. I've heard John Surtees asked which he prefers and you get a similar sort of answer. I don't ride motorbikes, but most of my sports and hobbies involve controlling something, often at speed (relatively!), and the truth is they're all so different that I find it hard to pick between them. Ok, for me a single seater racing car is the ultimate, but as for everything else, they're all just different, not better or worse and crucially, each person you speak to will give you a different answer as to what they prefer - not one answer applies to everyone.

[Mastodon2]

Wind 'em up, watch em' go.

[Biker's Nemesis]

T0MMY said:

Woah there, I didn't post up my videos to show off, Biker's Stalker went and found them and posted one up to criticise me for some bizarre reason.

Now given that I quickly found his videos and they were amusingly slower, would you have not mentioned it? I didn't even link them, just pointed out that greenhouse dwellers shouldn't throw stones.

Anyway, I'm sure I was making valid points a while back in this thread but I can't even remember what about any more

Listen up slow coach, I looked at your profile to see what you had in your garage because you seemed to like flapping your gums quite a bit.

I noticed a video in your profile of someone (who you claim is you) missing every apex so I pointed that out.

You said something about riding your bike a Kawasaki ZXR or whatever it is on road tyres. ( I really can't be arsed to look back)

I then pointed out that the bike in the video is a Honda CBR 600RR and not a Kawasaki!

You said my video was slower than yours to which I have not denied. I am glad I did make a thread back in June 2009 when I attached my brand new Go Pro camera at the end of a hard day to try it out.

I could have explained about the camera at the time but I couldn't be arsed.

So, you just get yourself and your camera along to a TD next year and lets see who's slow. Keep an eye out in Biker Banter, I always post where and when.

Oh, I was messaged on FB to come and have a look back at this thread.

P.S.

Nice Kawasaki/Honda 600 you have there.

[Biker's Nemesis]

Don't bother replying.

[T0MMY]

Biker's Nemesis said:

Listen up slow coach, I looked at your profile to see what you had in your garage because you seemed to like flapping your gums quite a bit.

I noticed a video in your profile of someone (who you claim is you) missing every apex so I pointed that out.

You said something about riding your bike a Kawasaki ZXR or whatever it is on road tyres. ( I really can't be arsed to look back)

I then pointed out that the bike in the video is a Honda CBR 600RR and not a Kawasaki!

You said my video was slower than yours to which I have not denied. I am glad I did make a thread back in June 2009 when I attached my brand new Go Pro camera at the end of a hard day to try it out.

I could have explained about the camera at the time but I couldn't be arsed.

So, you just get yourself and your camera along to a TD next year and lets see who's slow. Keep an eye out in Biker Banter, I always post where and when.

Oh, I was messaged on FB to come and have a look back at this thread.

P.S.

Nice Kawasaki/Honda 600 you have there.

I was simply replying to you saying I'd never ridden a bike hard, posting literally the slowest Cadwell video from my profile as proof. That would have been less irritating if your own laptimes weren't considerably worse even than those ones. Not just Cadwell by the way, Snetterton too (over the sections we both did) so I guess that was also a last session camera test for another brand new camera?

I own both a ZX6R and a CBR6, both are totally standard and on road tyres bar the swanky fairings and steering damper so if you couldn't go faster than me on an R1 with slicks I'd be quite surprised...should easily be getting well into the 1.30s at Cadwell on that (apparently) so feel free to send me a link to the video if you do so.

[Biker's Nemesis]

See ya.