Why don't more performance car enthusiasts ride motorbikes?
Discussion
BlackPrince said:
I have to say that until now I admired British bike licensing but I do wonder if it scares off people due to high time and financial cost. I was reading that the cost varies from £500-1000!!! There's no question that British riders are on average more skilled than North American riders but thats just ridiculous. My license cost me the equiv of £150 (about $300 Cdn) and even when I moved to Ireland and had to learn to filter through moving traffic for the first time (I used to illegally do it at red lights in Canada), somehow I didn't die or have an accident despite having a bike as my only transport for the whole time I was there.
Also, bikers on here slagging off car drivers for using Clarksonesque phrases - wind your neck in please! You're not going to attract more riders by acting like tw@ts yourselves!
I’m not slagging them off, I’m laughing at how pathetic they are, there is a subtle difference. The main difference is that I’m laughing at their inability to think for themselves. I’m pretty certain, those worshipping at the Clarkson altar are unlikely to ride a bike at any point in their life. Also, bikers on here slagging off car drivers for using Clarksonesque phrases - wind your neck in please! You're not going to attract more riders by acting like tw@ts yourselves!
LetsTryAgain said:
Stopped buying fast cars once I bought my first super bike.
A £2k Fireblade will decimate all this side of 600 BHP.
A fast Caterham or similar (Atom, 3-Eleven etc) will be similar in lap times, if not a bit quicker with a fraction of that power. Naturally, once you move into track cars the bike wouldn't stand a chance in any measure.A £2k Fireblade will decimate all this side of 600 BHP.
Gavia said:
RobM77 said:
A fast Caterham or similar (Atom, 3-Eleven etc) will be similar in lap times, if not a bit quicker with a fraction of that power. Naturally, once you move into track cars the bike wouldn't stand a chance in any measure.
Most people only ride on the road. This is of course a purely academic point, as none of these machines can get anywhere near their potential on a normal public road. Comparing absolute performance of road bikes and road cars of that level of capability is like comparing top end tennis rackets if all you're doing is bouncing a ball in your front room
Edited by RobM77 on Monday 26th March 22:11
Loyly said:
RobM77 said:
A fast Caterham or similar (Atom, 3-Eleven etc) will be similar in lap times, if not a bit quicker with a fraction of that power. Naturally, once you move into track cars the bike wouldn't stand a chance in any measure.
How much Atom will you get for £2000 then? BlackPrince said:
I have to say that until now I admired British bike licensing but I do wonder if it scares off people due to high time and financial cost. I was reading that the cost varies from £500-1000!!! There's no question that British riders are on average more skilled than North American riders but thats just ridiculous. My license cost me the equiv of £150 (about $300 Cdn) and even when I moved to Ireland and had to learn to filter through moving traffic for the first time (I used to illegally do it at red lights in Canada), somehow I didn't die or have an accident despite having a bike as my only transport for the whole time I was there.
Also, bikers on here slagging off car drivers for using Clarksonesque phrases - wind your neck in please! You're not going to attract more riders by acting like tw@ts yourselves!
Sounds a lot, but consider that you get fuel, a bike , a helmet , gloves and a jacket, one on one instruction (in my case) and up to 6 hours a lesson then its not so expensive. Plus you could cram it all in a week. I am also glad that the tests are hard (ish), it certainly made a virgin biker like me more appreciative of the skills and awareness after I passed.Also, bikers on here slagging off car drivers for using Clarksonesque phrases - wind your neck in please! You're not going to attract more riders by acting like tw@ts yourselves!
So the total figures you mention also include CBT, theory and MOD 1 and MOD 2 lessons and test fees, not so expensive now.
knitware said:
RobM77 said:
That wasn't the claim being made. The poster above was claiming that you'd need a car with over 600bhp to get near a £2k Fireblade. I was simply stating that wasn't even close to true. I'm sat next to a car right now that will equal a Moto GP bike around Silverstone and it only has 200bhp.
Ridden and driven by whom? Could you post a YouTube video!Jake Hughes, FR EuroCup: 1:57.708. 2015.
Marc Marquez, Moto GP, 1'59.941. 2015.
I really don't want to start another bike vs cars argument here. I was simply refuting the above stated 'fact' that you'd need 600bhp in a car to get near a £2k Fireblade. The fact is you can beat the fastest bikes in the world with only around 200bhp (a fair bit less than a Moto GP bike), so likewise you'd probably beat a £2k Fireblade with less power that it's got. Four wheels on the ground means more grip, and the fact that a car doesn't have to lean means you can use big wide sticky tyres - no contest. 600bhp would of course be an entirely different kettle of fish!!
Gavia said:
I’m not slagging them off, I’m laughing at how pathetic they are, there is a subtle difference. The main difference is that I’m laughing at their inability to think for themselves. I’m pretty certain, those worshipping at the Clarkson altar are unlikely to ride a bike at any point in their life.
But YOU'RE the one saying they worship at the Clarkson altar - for all you know they might not be aware of Clarkson's thoughts on bikes at all. Certainly here in Canada, where most casual car enthusiasts have never seen Top Gear, the odd time bikes have come up, Clarksonesque answers have been given and they don't even really know who Clarkson is! Clarkson just sums up stupid answers in general (not to mention being somewhat racist, sexist and homophobic). He did ride a bike (well a scooter) in that Vietnam video though. If you ask me, Hammond is worse for biking with his "only real men ride bikes" bulls
t RobM77 said:
I was being kind. The bike is actually over 2 seconds slower.
Jake Hughes, FR EuroCup: 1:57.708. 2015.
Marc Marquez, Moto GP, 1'59.941. 2015.
I really don't want to start another bike vs cars argument here. I was simply refuting the above stated 'fact' that you'd need 600bhp in a car to get near a £2k Fireblade. The fact is you can beat the fastest bikes in the world with only around 200bhp (a fair bit less than a Moto GP bike), so likewise you'd probably beat a £2k Fireblade with less power that it's got. Four wheels on the ground means more grip, and the fact that a car doesn't have to lean means you can use big wide sticky tyres - no contest. 600bhp would of course be an entirely different kettle of fish!!
That’s a race car, that’s full of aero and bears no relation to a road bike. Put an early Superbike up against most roadgoing cars and the car wouldn’t see which way it went. This thread is heading into your favourite topic of bikes vs cars at the TT. Jake Hughes, FR EuroCup: 1:57.708. 2015.
Marc Marquez, Moto GP, 1'59.941. 2015.
I really don't want to start another bike vs cars argument here. I was simply refuting the above stated 'fact' that you'd need 600bhp in a car to get near a £2k Fireblade. The fact is you can beat the fastest bikes in the world with only around 200bhp (a fair bit less than a Moto GP bike), so likewise you'd probably beat a £2k Fireblade with less power that it's got. Four wheels on the ground means more grip, and the fact that a car doesn't have to lean means you can use big wide sticky tyres - no contest. 600bhp would of course be an entirely different kettle of fish!!
I’m not sure why you get such a kick out of derailing the thread. The thread was about why more performance car drivers don’t ride bikes, not why amateur car racers don’t race bikes.
Gavia said:
RobM77 said:
I was being kind. The bike is actually over 2 seconds slower.
Jake Hughes, FR EuroCup: 1:57.708. 2015.
Marc Marquez, Moto GP, 1'59.941. 2015.
I really don't want to start another bike vs cars argument here. I was simply refuting the above stated 'fact' that you'd need 600bhp in a car to get near a £2k Fireblade. The fact is you can beat the fastest bikes in the world with only around 200bhp (a fair bit less than a Moto GP bike), so likewise you'd probably beat a £2k Fireblade with less power that it's got. Four wheels on the ground means more grip, and the fact that a car doesn't have to lean means you can use big wide sticky tyres - no contest. 600bhp would of course be an entirely different kettle of fish!!
That’s a race car, that’s full of aero and bears no relation to a road bike. Put an early Superbike up against most roadgoing cars and the car wouldn’t see which way it went. This thread is heading into your favourite topic of bikes vs cars at the TT. Jake Hughes, FR EuroCup: 1:57.708. 2015.
Marc Marquez, Moto GP, 1'59.941. 2015.
I really don't want to start another bike vs cars argument here. I was simply refuting the above stated 'fact' that you'd need 600bhp in a car to get near a £2k Fireblade. The fact is you can beat the fastest bikes in the world with only around 200bhp (a fair bit less than a Moto GP bike), so likewise you'd probably beat a £2k Fireblade with less power that it's got. Four wheels on the ground means more grip, and the fact that a car doesn't have to lean means you can use big wide sticky tyres - no contest. 600bhp would of course be an entirely different kettle of fish!!
I’m not sure why you get such a kick out of derailing the thread. The thread was about why more performance car drivers don’t ride bikes, not why amateur car racers don’t race bikes.
That should have been a one post answer, so I think it's you that's derailing the thread here, not me. Nobody asked whether "most road cars" would, or whether amateur car racers race bikes (WTF?! where did that come from?), or whether the car had to be bought for £2k etc etc - they just made a statement that wasn't true and I corrected them. You want road legal - grab any fast lightweight like a Caterham, Atom or 3-Eleven and the old Fireblade wouldn't stand a chance. Get over it and let the thread move on.
Edited by RobM77 on Monday 26th March 22:44
RobM77 said:
Gavia said:
RobM77 said:
I was being kind. The bike is actually over 2 seconds slower.
Jake Hughes, FR EuroCup: 1:57.708. 2015.
Marc Marquez, Moto GP, 1'59.941. 2015.
I really don't want to start another bike vs cars argument here. I was simply refuting the above stated 'fact' that you'd need 600bhp in a car to get near a £2k Fireblade. The fact is you can beat the fastest bikes in the world with only around 200bhp (a fair bit less than a Moto GP bike), so likewise you'd probably beat a £2k Fireblade with less power that it's got. Four wheels on the ground means more grip, and the fact that a car doesn't have to lean means you can use big wide sticky tyres - no contest. 600bhp would of course be an entirely different kettle of fish!!
That’s a race car, that’s full of aero and bears no relation to a road bike. Put an early Superbike up against most roadgoing cars and the car wouldn’t see which way it went. This thread is heading into your favourite topic of bikes vs cars at the TT. Jake Hughes, FR EuroCup: 1:57.708. 2015.
Marc Marquez, Moto GP, 1'59.941. 2015.
I really don't want to start another bike vs cars argument here. I was simply refuting the above stated 'fact' that you'd need 600bhp in a car to get near a £2k Fireblade. The fact is you can beat the fastest bikes in the world with only around 200bhp (a fair bit less than a Moto GP bike), so likewise you'd probably beat a £2k Fireblade with less power that it's got. Four wheels on the ground means more grip, and the fact that a car doesn't have to lean means you can use big wide sticky tyres - no contest. 600bhp would of course be an entirely different kettle of fish!!
I’m not sure why you get such a kick out of derailing the thread. The thread was about why more performance car drivers don’t ride bikes, not why amateur car racers don’t race bikes.
That should have been a one post answer, so I think it's you that's derailing the thread here, not me. Nobody asked whether "most road cars" would, or whether amateur car racers race bikes (WTF?! where did that come from?), or whether the car had to be bought for £2k etc etc - they just made a statement that wasn't true and I corrected them. You want road legal - grab any fast lightweight like a Caterham, Atom or 3-Eleven and the old Fireblade wouldn't stand a chance. Get over it and let the thread move on.
Edited by RobM77 on Monday 26th March 22:44
I ride for fun, mainly, who gives a monkeys about air-con, four seats, bluetooth, you won't understand until you ride a motorcycle.
RobM77 said:
I was being kind. The bike is actually over 2 seconds slower.
Jake Hughes, FR EuroCup: 1:57.708. 2015.
Marc Marquez, Moto GP, 1'59.941. 2015.
I really don't want to start another bike vs cars argument here. I was simply refuting the above stated 'fact' that you'd need 600bhp in a car to get near a £2k Fireblade. The fact is you can beat the fastest bikes in the world with only around 200bhp (a fair bit less than a Moto GP bike), so likewise you'd probably beat a £2k Fireblade with less power that it's got. Four wheels on the ground means more grip, and the fact that a car doesn't have to lean means you can use big wide sticky tyres - no contest. 600bhp would of course be an entirely different kettle of fish!!
The poster of the 2k Fireblade doesn't have a Superbike he has a Sportsbike, a race car will be faster than a Superbike around a race circuit but when it comes to road cars it's completely different, that Fireblade would probably dispense with most new cars this side of 50k, it's the reason when they compare bikes to cars they choose a six figure supercar to try & get close to the Sportsbike, an M3 for example wouldn't stand a chance.Jake Hughes, FR EuroCup: 1:57.708. 2015.
Marc Marquez, Moto GP, 1'59.941. 2015.
I really don't want to start another bike vs cars argument here. I was simply refuting the above stated 'fact' that you'd need 600bhp in a car to get near a £2k Fireblade. The fact is you can beat the fastest bikes in the world with only around 200bhp (a fair bit less than a Moto GP bike), so likewise you'd probably beat a £2k Fireblade with less power that it's got. Four wheels on the ground means more grip, and the fact that a car doesn't have to lean means you can use big wide sticky tyres - no contest. 600bhp would of course be an entirely different kettle of fish!!
Step away from 1000cc Sportsbikes & things get a lot closer between road cars/bikes.
675cc Street Triple 105bhp 182kgs vs F Type V6 S 375bhp 1600kgs
https://youtu.be/SRQ1hxIucwM
That Blade is putting out 140bhp at best so the reality is a 500bhp sportscar would be the thing that would give the Blade a hard time.
With the newer bikes then (with their 200bhp 200kg fully fuelled) it would take a 650S to keep with the bike on the road if both were ridden/driven by people of the same ability.
Most encounters I've had with supercars have been in roll on situations (motorway) where I've had fun but ultimately beaten them on an A road one of my best encounters was supercharged RS4 but the give & take nature of the A road we were on worked in my favour but it was good fun.
Take a look at this clip of Chris Harris in a GT2 RS vs 1199S the bike hits the limiter in top at 186mph (this is an enforced voluntary limit from the manufacturers but a change of sprocket sorts this) just to get an idea of the actual acceleration a bike is capable of.
https://youtu.be/wael3IrPu44
Back to the original question & the answer is simple people are afraid of riding, which is fine each to their own, there's also another reason & that's that you have to work at going fast on a bike which some people don't want to do especially when they can be quick in a car & have a Latte whilst doing so.
brrapp said:
Gavia said:
That’s a race car, that’s full of aero and bears
Sorry, I know I'm taking it all out out of context, but I've just got a picture in my head of Yogi and Booboo sitting in the cockpit of an F1 munching on bubble filled chocolate bars.RobM77 said:
Someone stated that you'd need a 600bhp car to keep up with a £2k Fireblade. I simply stated that wasn't true.
That should have been a one post answer, so I think it's you that's derailing the thread here, not me. Nobody asked whether "most road cars" would, or whether amateur car racers race bikes (WTF?! where did that come from?), or whether the car had to be bought for £2k etc etc - they just made a statement that wasn't true and I corrected them. You want road legal - grab any fast lightweight like a Caterham, Atom or 3-Eleven and the old Fireblade wouldn't stand a chance. Get over it and let the thread move on.
I enjoy driving a lot more than riding these days, so I guess I'm more of a car person than a bike person rn. My relatively sedate sports saloon with a legally-loud exhaust gives me 60% of the thrills of a bike with none of the compromises, and gives me pleasure in dimensions a bike can't match [like a great stereo, and soothing heat (though I've never tried heated gear so perhaps it feels similarly soothing)]. I'll always have a bike til the day I die though because for a quick surge of serotonin, nothing beats them (admittedly I haven't tried a Pagani Zonda or similar so can't comment on those, though I'll never be able to afford them so the matter is academic). That should have been a one post answer, so I think it's you that's derailing the thread here, not me. Nobody asked whether "most road cars" would, or whether amateur car racers race bikes (WTF?! where did that come from?), or whether the car had to be bought for £2k etc etc - they just made a statement that wasn't true and I corrected them. You want road legal - grab any fast lightweight like a Caterham, Atom or 3-Eleven and the old Fireblade wouldn't stand a chance. Get over it and let the thread move on.
Edited by RobM77 on Monday 26th March 22:44
However, the notion that any Caterham except the absolute quickest ones could beat a Fireblade is so ridiculous it beggars belief. And if we're looking at something like a Caterham 620R or Atom V8, a Ducati V4 Panigale Speciale WILL be quicker in a straight line, and should be quicker around most tracks. I'm sure most here have seen the autocar video of the Ducati 1199 Superleggera beating the McLaren P1 and Porsche 918 to 190 mph, after which the cars catch up and overtake - again irrelevant anywhere except Brutingthorpe because you can never get to >> 180mph on most racetracks in the UK and to do so on the road for long periods is suicidal in car or bike. Track times for the quickest bikes and very very quick non-hypercars are also very similar, with some publications reporting the bike is quicker, and others the car.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff