IOM TT 2018 Car Lap record run?

[Welshbeef]

wormus said:

Agreed by whom? A bunch of PH idiots, who’ve never been to the IOM?

No disrespect, just making a general point that many PHers make stuff up.

Edited by wormus on Thursday 22 August 19:45

Relative to the ring how more or less bumpy is the TT given you know TT and I’d wager have been to the ring?

[RB Will]

Hungrymc said:

I’d say one of the remarkable aspects of this is how close to a bike available at the dealer and that a lot of bikers ride on the road actually are.

That’s one thing we need to figure out yet. The only lap we have on record of an equivalent showroom bike was comfortably slower than the Subaru. Gets dismissed by the bikers as the rider half assing it.

We had a look at the Superstock technical regs on here and if I remember right it essentially boiled down to +10% power -10% weight and a few suspension bits.
Which is a pretty significant gain.

If I put in another 50bhp, took out 130kg and sorted out the suspension on my car it would lap considerably faster.

[RobM77]

RumbleOfThunder said:

Cars are so much faster than bikes on every track, road and hillclimb in the world.

As I stated earlier in the thread, a Moto GP bike with over 1600bhp/tonne is four seconds slower (which is forever in motorsport) around Silverstone than a FRenault with 420bhp/tonne and very little downforce; both running slicks. It's not even close, and that's with four times the power to weight ratio and a top speed of 200mph+ vs about 135mph.

But, as someone stated above, this is missing the point - performance is only one facet. Bikes are enormous fun and are far better for spectators when they race. They also sound incredible with their high revving engines. I can't see why people get so upset about them being slower; they're better in almost all other "PH" type measures.

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 23 August 08:27

[Welshbeef]

RobM77 said:

As I stated earlier in the thread, a Moto GP bike with over 1600bhp/tonne is five seconds slower (which is forever in motorsport) around Silverstone than a FRenault with 420bhp/tonne and very little downforce; both running slicks. It's not even close.

But, as someone stated above, this is missing the point - performance is only one facet. Bikes are enormous fun and are far better for spectators when they race. They also sound incredible with their high revving engines. I can't see why people get so upset about them being slower; they're better in almost all other "PH" type measures.

Best of both worlds a hybusa engined caterham 7 style car high revs and on the edge of handling and “affordable” to a lot of people vs the odd person who can afford The super fast machines

[Hungrymc]

RB Will said:

That’s one thing we need to figure out yet. The only lap we have on record of an equivalent showroom bike was comfortably slower than the Subaru. Gets dismissed by the bikers as the rider half assing it.

We had a look at the Superstock technical regs on here and if I remember right it essentially boiled down to +10% power -10% weight and a few suspension bits.
Which is a pretty significant gain.

If I put in another 50bhp, took out 130kg and sorted out the suspension on my car it would lap considerably faster.

Happy to defer to your knowledge, But I think Superstock bikes have to retain standard engine internals etc? They're even on road legal tyres?

Your car sounds impressive. Which showroom model is it that's weighting in at 1300KG and making 500hp? Must be something fairly exotic to be leaving the factory with those numbers?

On the general topic, I believe that fundamentally, a car has the capacity to lap more quickly than a bike. However, its a bit of a shocker that the Subaru can't get there despite being a pretty expensive and exotic build from a team with a serious reputation to defend and a business that's dependent on that reputation (they will not be taking this lightly)…. That's the shocker for me and it does cause me to question if the TT's unique nature really does favour the bikes.

[RobM77]

Welshbeef said:

RobM77 said:

As I stated earlier in the thread, a Moto GP bike with over 1600bhp/tonne is five seconds slower (which is forever in motorsport) around Silverstone than a FRenault with 420bhp/tonne and very little downforce; both running slicks. It's not even close.

But, as someone stated above, this is missing the point - performance is only one facet. Bikes are enormous fun and are far better for spectators when they race. They also sound incredible with their high revving engines. I can't see why people get so upset about them being slower; they're better in almost all other "PH" type measures.

Best of both worlds a hybusa engined caterham 7 style car high revs and on the edge of handling and “affordable” to a lot of people vs the odd person who can afford The super fast machines

I owned a FRenault for a few years, and it cost less than a decent Caterham or Elise to buy and run, including the trailer. The reason they're not popular is largely because of what I said above: speed isn't everything. Single seaters are cramped, noisy, and if you go flat out, they're quite physical to drive due to the performance. Caterhams are just loads of fun, plus you can use them on the road. Each to their own - for me at least speed hasn't been the deciding factor in buying any car, it's fun and availability of that fun. Surely that's why people buy motorbikes and watch them race? Enjoyment.

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 23 August 09:03

[JuniorD]

Taking the 7-odd mile Dundrod road circuit as a comparison, the bike lap record is 3 minutes and 15.316 seconds at an average speed of 136.415 mph (219.539 km/h) set by Peter Hickman riding a BMW during the 2019 Ulster Grand Prix.

The car lap record for the 1955 RAC Tourist Trophy on the Dundrod Circuit (which had a much tighter hairpin than the one nowadays) is 4 minutes and 42 seconds at an average speed of 94.67 mph (152.3582 km/h) held by Mike Hawthorn in a Jaguar D-Type

I know the Dundrod circuit like the back of my hand, and the thoughts of touching 94 mph let alone doing a lap at an average of 94mph in any car is frightening, which just goes to show how talented and brave the racing drivers of those days were.

On paper it must be entirely possible for a modern race car to beat the bike record but I just struggle mentally with the thoughts of any road car being driven at similar speeds around there.

[RB Will]

Hungrymc said:

RB Will said:

That’s one thing we need to figure out yet. The only lap we have on record of an equivalent showroom bike was comfortably slower than the Subaru. Gets dismissed by the bikers as the rider half assing it.

We had a look at the Superstock technical regs on here and if I remember right it essentially boiled down to +10% power -10% weight and a few suspension bits.
Which is a pretty significant gain.

If I put in another 50bhp, took out 130kg and sorted out the suspension on my car it would lap considerably faster.

Happy to defer to your knowledge, But I think Superstock bikes have to retain standard engine internals etc? They're even on road legal tyres?

Your car sounds impressive. Which showroom model is it that's weighting in at 1300KG and making 500hp? Must be something fairly exotic to be leaving the factory with those numbers?

On the general topic, I believe that fundamentally, a car has the capacity to lap more quickly than a bike. However, its a bit of a shocker that the Subaru can't get there despite being a pretty expensive and exotic build from a team with a serious reputation to defend and a business that's dependent on that reputation (they will not be taking this lightly)…. That's the shocker for me and it does cause me to question if the TT's unique nature really does favour the bikes.

Apologies for not being clear, my car isn’t a showroom model (modified Impreza) I was just using it to show what a jump the figures would make.
It may only sound like small changes made to the bike but small changes in a race scenario make a huge difference.
The superstock internals are standard but I think you were allowed exhaust and breathing mods? But whatever it was added up to about another 20-25bhp which on a bike combined with 10% less weight I guess makes quite a jump.

Just changing the tyres/ pressures made such a big difference on mine that over the distance of a TT lap would have just about been the gap between the best bikes and the Subaru. Let alone more power less weight

The nature of the TT definitely does favour the bikes. We know there are very few cars that can get near a big bike in a straight line and with most of the course being flat out I honestly think it’s impressive how well the car did considering it’s many seconds slower up to top speed and gives away about 20-30mph on the straights.
It may be a special car but consider how it started, as a big saloon with modest power designed for twisty roads.
Your average sport bike is a focussed weapon more akin to a BAC mono.

Another poster said what if a special bike was made. Would be interesting to see, maybe have opinion from some of the bikers here?
From what has been said by them so far it seems that giving a bike more power is a no go as it makes them unmanageable, and if you had to resort to a turbo that’s a fair bit more weight, heat and fuel to worry about, and making the chassis better as you would for a race bike is no good either so not sure how much better a bike can get?

[RobM77]

JuniorD said:

Taking the 7-odd mile Dundrod road circuit as a comparison, the bike lap record is 3 minutes and 15.316 seconds at an average speed of 136.415 mph (219.539 km/h) set by Peter Hickman riding a BMW during the 2019 Ulster Grand Prix.

The car lap record for the 1955 RAC Tourist Trophy on the Dundrod Circuit (which had a much tighter hairpin than the one nowadays) is 4 minutes and 42 seconds at an average speed of 94.67 mph (152.3582 km/h) held by Mike Hawthorn in a Jaguar D-Type

I know the Dundrod circuit like the back of my hand, and the thoughts of touching 94 mph let alone doing a lap at an average of 94mph in any car is frightening, which just goes to show how talented and brave the racing drivers of those days were.

On paper it must be entirely possible for a modern race car to beat the bike record but I just struggle mentally with the thoughts of any road car being driven at similar speeds around there.

The lap times are of course gained in different ways; if you have a bike and a car with similar lap times, the bike tends to be an awful lot faster down the straights. My example above was of a car over 4 seconds faster over a lap, but trailing the bike by 65mph in top speed.

If you're interested, in period the D Type record around Goodwood was 1:36.8, whereas the outright lap record was 1:20.4, set jointly by Stewart and Clark, presumably in a GP car (1965 though, so not the monster 3 litre cars). The lap's about a third of the time of the one you quoted, so 16.4 seconds would be roughly 50 seconds over that circuit, so about a 3:50 around Dundrod if a GP car had run back then. Obviously, yes, a modern car would be an awful lot faster than a '65 GP car.

[kiseca]

RobM77 said:

ZX10R NIN said:

kiseca said:

It really doesn't. Listen, I am interested on a casual level in the challenges that having the wheel and suspension cranked over at 50 degrees provides for trying to keep a tyre in contact with the road when encountering a bump. I stated my opinion that it would seem to be more of a challenge than the amount of suspension travel available, I'm happy to hear from someone who does know.

If you can explain it then great, I'm happy to listen. If not, I'm happy for you to move on and leave room for someone who will.

Here's an on board of a TT lap with different camera angles & you can see the front & rear suspension at work:

https://youtu.be/xNojOeofO7M

Remember the camera flatens out a lot of the crests/bumps so watch the headstock.

360 lap of the NW200

https://youtu.be/65mGNcmcLAQ

I think what kiseca's getting at is that the forces put into the wheel when a motorbike rides over a bump are in a different direction to the suspension movement. If a bike is leaning at 50 degrees to the vertical, then the suspension can only compress and extend in that inclined plane, whereas the bike is encountering surface undulations in the vertical plane.

This, almost.

When a bike leaning over encounters a bump, the bump is trying to push the wheel straight upwards, not up at an angle consistent with the bike's lean angle. Because the bike isn't at 90 degrees to the road (if it is, suspension travel is the least of the rider's problems) then some of the force will be soaked up by suspension compression but since it's not working directly on the suspension's optimal angle, I'm thinking that a bike's suspension has inherent compromises when cornering that a car does not. Hence, possibly a bumpier ride, or tyre more likely to lose contact with road surface... that's what I'm getting at. But I'm no expert, I don't know. I just thought that might be a more significant limiter than suspension travel.

[RobM77]

kiseca said:

RobM77 said:

ZX10R NIN said:

kiseca said:

It really doesn't. Listen, I am interested on a casual level in the challenges that having the wheel and suspension cranked over at 50 degrees provides for trying to keep a tyre in contact with the road when encountering a bump. I stated my opinion that it would seem to be more of a challenge than the amount of suspension travel available, I'm happy to hear from someone who does know.

If you can explain it then great, I'm happy to listen. If not, I'm happy for you to move on and leave room for someone who will.

Here's an on board of a TT lap with different camera angles & you can see the front & rear suspension at work:

https://youtu.be/xNojOeofO7M

Remember the camera flatens out a lot of the crests/bumps so watch the headstock.

360 lap of the NW200

https://youtu.be/65mGNcmcLAQ

I think what kiseca's getting at is that the forces put into the wheel when a motorbike rides over a bump are in a different direction to the suspension movement. If a bike is leaning at 50 degrees to the vertical, then the suspension can only compress and extend in that inclined plane, whereas the bike is encountering surface undulations in the vertical plane.

This, almost.

When a bike leaning over encounters a bump, the bump is trying to push the wheel straight upwards, not up at an angle consistent with the bike's lean angle. Because the bike isn't at 90 degrees to the road (if it is, suspension travel is the least of the rider's problems) then some of the force will be soaked up by suspension compression but since it's not working directly on the suspension's optimal angle, I'm thinking that a bike's suspension has inherent compromises when cornering that a car does not. Hence, possibly a bumpier ride, or tyre more likely to lose contact with road surface... that's what I'm getting at. But I'm no expert, I don't know. I just thought that might be a more significant limiter than suspension travel.

Isn't that exactly what I said?

[kiseca]

RobM77 said:

Isn't that exactly what I said?

Yes, it is. I misread it and thought you'd said that no force from the bump will compress the suspension. sorry!

[RobM77]

kiseca said:

RobM77 said:

Isn't that exactly what I said?

Yes, it is. I misread it and thought you'd said that no force from the bump will compress the suspension. sorry!

That's ok. Yes, that would only be the case at a 90 degree lean angle, which isn't that realistic

[ZX10R NIN]

A Superstock 1000cc will be roughly 295kgs+ once fueled & the rider is on board with the bike producing around 200-215bhp.

[GC8]

CypSIdders said:

I'm currently in a tent, in Peel, waiting for the weather to improve so practice for the Classic TT and the Manx GP can get underway properly.

I have a question for you.
How much faster would a bike get around the course if it was afforded the same concessions as the car has been?

What everyone forgets in this thread is, a bike has never had the luxury of doing a lap under the conditions afforded to the car.

Fair's fair, we need a level playing field.

So with a completely empty course, a flying start, no restrictions on exhaust, suspension, tyres, fuel pressure. fuel type, other mods not allowed under TT regs and half a million quid thrown at it, how much faster, than the current lap record, could the bike be?

GP bikes havent ever impressed on the Tourist Trophy...

[warch]

GC8 said:

GP bikes havent ever impressed on the Tourist Trophy...

That RC213V (Anstey and Rutter) didn't really seem to work on the TT, probably due to chassis stiffness. GP circuits are really really smooth by comparison with park circuits or even the best roads and bikes are optimised for these conditions.

TT bikes are set up with quite long travel, compliant suspension to cope with bumps (watch how much the fork compresses when they're in motion). Most sportsbikes straight out the showroom have very stiff suspension, which makes riding fast on poor road (or track) surfaces difficult. This is borne out in road tests, I read a magazine test a few years ago which suggested a humble Honda Hornet was much quicker on B roads than the then current crop of 600 supersports.

Guy Martin said in his first book that the first time he tried road racing it was with a bike set up for track use and it was absolutely terrible. A road racing setup will take all the minor road imperfections out so the bike doesn't become unsettled.

Of course track cars and especially rally cars can be setup in a similar way, although you'd need to work around the ground clearance on the former to allow for the increased suspension movement (even bikes ground out on severe landings).