STI TT lap vs Nürburgring...?
Discussion
DoubleD said:
Have you got the figures to prove that?
It's public knowledge, and to the best of my knowledge, after 110 years of the TT circuit, bikes are still the fastest. a few cars have tried but not done that well.Even Steve Sutcliffe agrees https://www.autocar.co.uk/opinion/motorsport/bike-...
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 25th July 22:46
Again due to Bespoke Chassis BHP & Downforce the outright lap record goes to the car every time but when you start talking production cars & bikes it swings in the other direction. 
Time Attack 2 Production Class cars are allowed to be optimised
2015: 2014 Porsche 911 Turbo S 10.26 552bhp
2017: 2017 Honda NSX 10.03 573bhp
Outright Record
2013 Sébastien Loeb Peugeot 208 T16 Pikes Peak 8:13
It seems that Pikes Peak doesn't suit Sportsbikes judging by the fact that Streetfighters take up the top slots, which is surprising as they're normally a whole lot slower than a Sportsbike.
Bikes Optimised
Middleweight 550cc-848cc 2017: 2016 Husqvarna Supermoto 10.34
Heavyweight 849cc - 999cc 2014: 2013 Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R 9.58 197bhp
Heavyweight 1000-1400cc 2017: 2017 KTM Super Duke 1290 R 9.49 174bhp
That's impressive 14 seconds faster on a bike that's not a cutting edge sportsbike & has 400bhp less than the car
For those that don't know a Streetfighter looks like this:
So RBWill you're correct that Pikes Peak does suit bikes but not only does it bikes it really suits the lower powered models with the not so good chassis.
Time Attack 2 Production Class cars are allowed to be optimised
2015: 2014 Porsche 911 Turbo S 10.26 552bhp
2017: 2017 Honda NSX 10.03 573bhp
Outright Record
2013 Sébastien Loeb Peugeot 208 T16 Pikes Peak 8:13
It seems that Pikes Peak doesn't suit Sportsbikes judging by the fact that Streetfighters take up the top slots, which is surprising as they're normally a whole lot slower than a Sportsbike.
Bikes Optimised
Middleweight 550cc-848cc 2017: 2016 Husqvarna Supermoto 10.34
Heavyweight 849cc - 999cc 2014: 2013 Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R 9.58 197bhp
Heavyweight 1000-1400cc 2017: 2017 KTM Super Duke 1290 R 9.49 174bhp
That's impressive 14 seconds faster on a bike that's not a cutting edge sportsbike & has 400bhp less than the car
For those that don't know a Streetfighter looks like this:
So RBWill you're correct that Pikes Peak does suit bikes but not only does it bikes it really suits the lower powered models with the not so good chassis.
Edited by ZX10R NIN on Wednesday 26th July 16:50
wormus said:
DoubleD said:
Have you got the figures to prove that?
It's public knowledge, and to the best of my knowledge, after 110 years of the TT circuit, bikes are still the fastest. a few cars have tried but not done that well.Even Steve Sutcliffe agrees https://www.autocar.co.uk/opinion/motorsport/bike-...
Edited by wormus on Tuesday 25th July 22:46
How many cars have gone around the TT circuit? Nowhere near the 1000s of bikes that have gone around it.
There is a huge amount of competition for bike teams to push the limits at the TT, where is the competition with cars? A few laps with the odd manufacturer is about the lot.
So reading this thread what i read from this is:
No top level downforce cars have run at the TT, so we havent seen the full expression of whats avaliable from 4 wheels there.
No top level bikes have run at Pikes Peak so we havent seen the full expression of whats avaliable from 2 wheels there.
Physics say that a car will be faster on any circuit, whether thats track or road.
Again thats talking about the pinicle of each type
Bikes are better getting through traffic and are cheaper......which isnt really relevant to this discussion.
If for some reason a F1 team really decided they wanted to take the lap record they could, obviously they would adjust the ride height and geometry for the conditions.
Due to the very small amount of cars that have been allowed to run at the TT its not surprising that they havent caught up with the bikes yet, but the organisers are never going to open it properly to cars to enter for 2 reasons, its a celebration of bikes and also it would take the shine off if a car lapped faster than a bike.
No top level downforce cars have run at the TT, so we havent seen the full expression of whats avaliable from 4 wheels there.
No top level bikes have run at Pikes Peak so we havent seen the full expression of whats avaliable from 2 wheels there.
Physics say that a car will be faster on any circuit, whether thats track or road.
Again thats talking about the pinicle of each type
Bikes are better getting through traffic and are cheaper......which isnt really relevant to this discussion.
If for some reason a F1 team really decided they wanted to take the lap record they could, obviously they would adjust the ride height and geometry for the conditions.
Due to the very small amount of cars that have been allowed to run at the TT its not surprising that they havent caught up with the bikes yet, but the organisers are never going to open it properly to cars to enter for 2 reasons, its a celebration of bikes and also it would take the shine off if a car lapped faster than a bike.
turbotoaster said:
Physics say that a car will be faster on any circuit, whether thats track or road.
.
Not always, and I think that's the point most car fans are missing, a car may have the potential to carry more corner speed and perform better in fast braking areas but that assumes it has the power to weight to maintain the same acceleration along the straights as the bike. In general, most cars are dog slow as they are heavy and not very powerful so this is where cost DOES come into it. What's the point comparing a £1m stripped out racer or F1 car, with a production £18k motorcycle? .
There are loads of examples posted above where bikes can be faster than cars so it's not accurate to suggest cars are (always) faster than bikes, especially as many of us will never come close to a car in our lifetime that is.
If cars are always faster on a circuit, how do you explain this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0ZyQhROBE
More accurate would be - some car/driver combinations are faster than some bike/rider combinations...on some road/tracks.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 26th July 08:55
DoubleD said:
Opinion is not fact though.
How many cars have gone around the TT circuit? Nowhere near the 1000s of bikes that have gone around it.
There is a huge amount of competition for bike teams to push the limits at the TT, where is the competition with cars? A few laps with the odd manufacturer is about the lot.
Well it is a fact until somebody proves otherwise. Some people were convinced Higgins Subaru would be as fast/faster than a bike but it wasn't. How many cars have gone around the TT circuit? Nowhere near the 1000s of bikes that have gone around it.
There is a huge amount of competition for bike teams to push the limits at the TT, where is the competition with cars? A few laps with the odd manufacturer is about the lot.
I disagree that a car needs to be 'top level'. In the list I quoted yesterday of car categories consistently faster than Moto GP on all circuits, some are quite low down the tree in motorsport. FR and F3 both run two litre four cylinder engines.
I find the claim regarding roads rather bizarre and tenuous! Especially given that on a previous thread like this I posted two You Tube videos from the IoM, one of a rather lacklustre hillclimb performance in a car on a section of the TT course and the other of the current outright bike lap record. It wasn't exactly a fair comparison, but nevertheless the car was faster over the stretch it drove. This is also the case on every closed road hillclimb I've ever known, and as stated previously, every single race track in the entire world. As stated above, the reason the full TT course records are different is that it's an event for bikes only. The only cars to have a go at the TT have been one off demo laps and I'm only aware of two cars: Tony Pond's Rover 827 and Higgins in the Subaru: not enough time for car or race engineers and not fast enough cars (the Scooby did just under 7 minutes at the ring, and the car lap record by a 30 year old car is 6m11!). It's also pretty bloody obvious that if cars are faster at the 13 mile Nurburgring Nordschliefe, then they're going to be even further ahead after 38 miles of the IoM TT course.
I think we need a special mention for Wormus' use of the word 'also' in this sentence:
I find the claim regarding roads rather bizarre and tenuous! Especially given that on a previous thread like this I posted two You Tube videos from the IoM, one of a rather lacklustre hillclimb performance in a car on a section of the TT course and the other of the current outright bike lap record. It wasn't exactly a fair comparison, but nevertheless the car was faster over the stretch it drove. This is also the case on every closed road hillclimb I've ever known, and as stated previously, every single race track in the entire world. As stated above, the reason the full TT course records are different is that it's an event for bikes only. The only cars to have a go at the TT have been one off demo laps and I'm only aware of two cars: Tony Pond's Rover 827 and Higgins in the Subaru: not enough time for car or race engineers and not fast enough cars (the Scooby did just under 7 minutes at the ring, and the car lap record by a 30 year old car is 6m11!). It's also pretty bloody obvious that if cars are faster at the 13 mile Nurburgring Nordschliefe, then they're going to be even further ahead after 38 miles of the IoM TT course.
I think we need a special mention for Wormus' use of the word 'also' in this sentence:
wormus said:
Bikes are faster on the road as they can get through traffic and accelerate faster than pretty much 100% of cars on the road. Cars have the advantage on most circuits, except where the circuit is a road, like the TT circuit, then the bike also wins.
That's like saying "I'm shorter than a tall man, unless I stand on a box, when I'm also taller". Edited by RobM77 on Wednesday 26th July 09:27
Lol, it always devolves into bikes vs. cars.
I've always thought it's simple. Where width, visibility and usually acceleration, are the perquisites to make progress, bikes are better adapted. Where cornering speeds and braking are more critical, cars are obviously hugely superior, and fairly idiot proof. So they're usually quicker.
I'd maintain there aren't many driver's roads in the UK which reward high cornering speeds and braking however. Most drivers' roads in the UK are rural, and that means narrow, low visibility, and lots of hazards. So it's largely point and squirt, usual exceptions and caveats apply of course.
Any argument about "using the bikes performance" is utterly moot, as the same equally applies to cars.
I've always thought it's simple. Where width, visibility and usually acceleration, are the perquisites to make progress, bikes are better adapted. Where cornering speeds and braking are more critical, cars are obviously hugely superior, and fairly idiot proof. So they're usually quicker.
I'd maintain there aren't many driver's roads in the UK which reward high cornering speeds and braking however. Most drivers' roads in the UK are rural, and that means narrow, low visibility, and lots of hazards. So it's largely point and squirt, usual exceptions and caveats apply of course.
Any argument about "using the bikes performance" is utterly moot, as the same equally applies to cars.
Prof Prolapse said:
Lol, it always devolves into bikes vs. cars.
I've always thought it's simple. Where width, visibility and usually acceleration, are the perquisites to make progress, bikes are better adapted. Where cornering speeds and braking are more critical, cars are obviously hugely superior, and fairly idiot proof. So they're usually quicker.
I'd maintain there aren't many driver's roads in the UK which reward high cornering speeds and braking however. Most drivers' roads in the UK are rural, and that means narrow, low visibility, and lots of hazards. So it's largely point and squirt, usual exceptions and caveats apply of course.
Any argument about "using the bikes performance" is utterly moot, as the same equally applies to cars.
I've always thought it's simple. Where width, visibility and usually acceleration, are the perquisites to make progress, bikes are better adapted. Where cornering speeds and braking are more critical, cars are obviously hugely superior, and fairly idiot proof. So they're usually quicker.
I'd maintain there aren't many driver's roads in the UK which reward high cornering speeds and braking however. Most drivers' roads in the UK are rural, and that means narrow, low visibility, and lots of hazards. So it's largely point and squirt, usual exceptions and caveats apply of course.
Any argument about "using the bikes performance" is utterly moot, as the same equally applies to cars.
It's a shame that these discussions always degenerate into the very specific argument of which is faster around a timed lap, because the answer to that is well proven and obvious. The reason this is a shame is that bikes win in so many other situations, which you mention, plus cost of course, and for many people, fun too. They're also arguably better to watch in motorsport from a spectating point of view - and by motorsport I don't just mean circuit racing.wormus said:
DoubleD said:
Opinion is not fact though.
How many cars have gone around the TT circuit? Nowhere near the 1000s of bikes that have gone around it.
There is a huge amount of competition for bike teams to push the limits at the TT, where is the competition with cars? A few laps with the odd manufacturer is about the lot.
Well it is a fact until somebody proves otherwise. Some people were convinced Higgins Subaru would be as fast/faster than a bike but it wasn't. How many cars have gone around the TT circuit? Nowhere near the 1000s of bikes that have gone around it.
There is a huge amount of competition for bike teams to push the limits at the TT, where is the competition with cars? A few laps with the odd manufacturer is about the lot.
People's opinions were that the Subaru would be faster, the fact is it wasnt.
Your opinion is that an F1 car would be slower than the bikes, but at the moment that is all it is, an opinion.
RobM77 said:
It's a shame that these discussions always degenerate into the very specific argument of which is faster around a timed lap, because the answer to that is well proven and obvious. The reason this is a shame is that bikes win in so many other situations, which you mention, plus cost of course, and for many people, fun too. They're also arguably better to watch in motorsport from a spectating point of view - and by motorsport I don't just mean circuit racing.Personally I can say there's nothing quite like the disappointment of driving a supercar or superbike, when you cannot escape some f
king maniac, cutting corners, in badly driven rotten hatchback. That sinking feeling, when you turn off the TCS, engage "sport" and, you start taking it very seriously. When they keep reappearing in your mirror. The brown rusty turd which won't flush beyond the horizon.I remember that first humbling moment, when I realised, all our obsessing over performance statistics, lap times, cars vs bikes, technology, tyres, and technique is pointless. We're just shooting the s
t. The reality is, nothing is faster than a mad
. On the roads at least. RobM77 said:
It's a shame that these discussions always degenerate into the very specific argument of which is faster around a timed lap, because the answer to that is well proven and obvious. The reason this is a shame is that bikes win in so many other situations, which you mention, plus cost of course, and for many people, fun too. They're also arguably better to watch in motorsport from a spectating point of view - and by motorsport I don't just mean circuit racing.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0ZyQhROBE
The bike is carrying more corner speed than either the McLaren or the Civic (touring) car and beats both down the straights too. In the wet or on a different circuit with different cars, the result could be different.
IMHO, the "It's physics innit" is a blunt, lazy argument when used in this context as there are so many variables. Not many cars have raced at the TT circuit but that doesn't mean that a car would automatically faster just because it has 4 wheels and "it's physics". The Subaru team had a number of practice laps and put in a heroic effort but in this case, in a stripped out rally car with over 600hp, they didn't get close to the bike lap times. That's not to say it isn't possible to go faster on/in either.
I think it's fine to enjoy cars and bikes for what they are and just accept they are different.
wormus said:
turbotoaster said:
Physics say that a car will be faster on any circuit, whether thats track or road.
Not always, and I think that's the point most car fans are missing, a car may have the potential to carry more corner speed and perform better in fast braking areas but that assumes it has the power to weight to maintain the same acceleration along the straights as the bike.This is also nothing to do with 'fans' as you say. These are just straight facts, not opinions.
wormus said:
There are loads of examples posted above where bikes can be faster than cars so it's not accurate to suggest cars are (always) faster than bikes, especially as many of us will never come close to a car in our lifetime that is.
If cars are always faster on a circuit, how do you explain this?
That doesn't make any sense, and I think you may have misunderstood the entire thread... Nobody has stated that cars are always faster; of course there are situations where a bike is faster if you choose the car and bike carefully. Hell, I'd probably be quicker sprinting 100 metres if we chose the car carefully (Austin 7 perhaps?). All we're saying is that ultimately, a car will always be faster. This is the case for every single race track in the world where both run plentifully, and it's usually by quite a large margin. As I said yesterday, around Silverstone the difference between an original 1960s Mini and Moto GP is less than the difference between Moto GP and the fastest car time. My point is as above this isn't a small effect - the difference is huge! This is one reason John Surtess switched from bikes to cars, he fancied trying something faster.If cars are always faster on a circuit, how do you explain this?
Edited by RobM77 on Wednesday 26th July 11:58
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff