Autobahn lunacy

Originally Posted by ophic

no way - cars are generally much faster in terms of top speed. A gixxer would easily win off the lights but even the lowly boxster is pushing 160-odd top speed. The rest of the range are faster than that (not counting the cayenne).

hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[yorkie_chris]

He's got a point. Bikes have the aerodynamics of a brick.

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

He's got a point. Bikes have the aerodynamics of a brick.

It's the power more than that (which is why a 110bhp bike can still do 170mph but a 110bhp car could not), a car might be a more slippery shape than a bike+rider is but with a much larger frontal area the car will generate considerably more drag than a bike.

[Spikenipple]

I loved riding on the Autobahns on my epic Euro trip. About half of the route from Nuremberg to Amsterdam was limitless Autobahn, and the entire 440 mile trip including 4 petrol/coffee/**** stops took me 6 hours. Now all I need to do is go back with a bigger bike....

[Luckypants]

Originally Posted by suzsv650

imho i think any gixxer is gona be faster than MOST of the porsche range.

Unrestricted autobahns can be very scary places! Quite ordinary cars can wind up to high top speeds, way beyond what most bikers can do. Holding 200kph (125 mph) on a bike is hard work, holding 230kph (144mph) in a car is as easy as holding the accelerator to the floor. Things like A4's, 3-series BMW, Mondeos etc can be wound up to flat out there in comfort while we are huddling down below the screen to get out the wind blast I can hold 220kph on the VFR but an SV rider would struggle to hold 200kph. A Gixxer would be hard work to hang on to at 250kph for more than 10 minutes IMO.

And make sure you look hard in your mirrors before pulling out to overtake, some of them come up on you in a second! That Corvette in the video goes past scary fast.....

I remember once on a 3 lane stretch of auto bahn.An English numpty was hogging the middle lane and a German truck just came up behind him and shunted him out of the way.
If you ever see a middle lane hogger ,just sit in the inside lane and wait.
Oh and Sundays are a good time ,because in parts of Germany ,trunks cant run untill monday...lol(so Ive been told by the inlaws)

[ophic]

Originally Posted by sinbad

It's the power more than that (which is why a 110bhp bike can still do 170mph but a 110bhp car could not), a car might be a more slippery shape than a bike+rider is but with a much larger frontal area the car will generate considerably more drag than a bike.

its both. Thrust to drag ratio determines top speed, and sports cars with slippery shapes and ridiculously powerful engines win easily here. Whereas traffic light gp acceleration is more dependent on power to weight, so the bikes win here. And of course as LP points out, the comfort factor is also very important.

Originally Posted by ophic

its both. Thrust to drag ratio determines top speed, and sports cars with slippery shapes and ridiculously powerful engines win easily here. Whereas traffic light gp acceleration is more dependent on power to weight, so the bikes win here. And of course as LP points out, the comfort factor is also very important.

You're of course right, but I was just adding that drag isn't the limiting factor for bikes in terms of top speed when compared with cars, bikes have an advantage there even if their shape is less efficient (because of a much much smaller frontal area). Drag co-efficient figures are meaningless without factoring in frontal area. The deficit of power is purely what stops a bike continuing to accelerate to silly speeds like a powerful car can.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by sinbad

You're of course right, but I was just adding that drag isn't the limiting factor for bikes in terms of top speed when compared with cars, bikes have an advantage there even if their shape is less efficient (because of a much much smaller frontal area). Drag co-efficient figures are meaningless without factoring in frontal area. The deficit of power is purely what stops a bike continuing to accelerate to silly speeds like a powerful car can.

See http://www.msgroup.org/forums/mtt/to...p?TOPIC_ID=955 post 5 for interest

[ophic]

Originally Posted by sinbad

You're of course right, but I was just adding that drag isn't the limiting factor for bikes in terms of top speed when compared with cars, bikes have an advantage there even if their shape is less efficient (because of a much much smaller frontal area). Drag co-efficient figures are meaningless without factoring in frontal area. The deficit of power is purely what stops a bike continuing to accelerate to silly speeds like a powerful car can.

I agree with that - overall drag from a bike is lower, but worse when compared to its frontal area, when up against a sports car. This is why an SV with 70bhp does 130mph, and an MGF with 140-odd bhp does the same speed.