Andy P Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 People saying bikes for straight cars for corners, if you know how to corner and are confident then a bike will do a car all day long in the corners. Prime example clean country lane lots of tight twisty corners the bike will be long gone as it accelerates so much quicker out of the corners and can go through them a lot quicker then most cars on the road.You're basing that on a bike that is more performance based than the road car following it.I'd put money on Sebastien Leob taking any backroad faster than any rider / bike combination of your choice even in his somewhat low powered French tin can Someone hit a nerve Andy?Not at all - I like bikes. I still want a Gixxer to show everyone how big my balls are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OD404 Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 You're basing that on a bike that is more performance based than the road car following it.I'd put money on Sebastien Leob taking any backroad faster than any rider / bike combination of your choice even in his somewhat low powered French tin can Not at all - I like bikes. I still want a Gixxer to show everyone how big my balls are.Similarly, a recent road trip involving a 1000cc GSXR and a Caterham showed that for people with similar driving/riding abilities, the Caterham spent most of its time pushing the bike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy P Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Yeah, you can't really base things on a backroad thrash. The bike will overtake on the strights when its clearly safe to do so, the car will be held up dramaticlly on the corners, but unable to overtake because its not safe to do so. Also, I'd be pretty weary of giving the Rider a tap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forteh Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Surely you cant compare rocket powered vehicles (thrust etc.) for top speed and accelleration as theyre not 'cars' in the sense that you can actually drive them anywhere.Round a circuit an F1 car is faster than motoGP, but then it costs a lot more and is a lot more aerodynamic, bikes are crap for aerodynamics unfortnately. A veyron tops 250mph, a naked turbo busa does about 220 (see ghostrider) so stick a fairing on and you may well be getting up to the same sort of speeds.I couldnt say which is quicker in a drag, again are you counting rocket powered or vehicles that the like of you and me can actually drive on the road? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OD404 Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Like I said, there's too many differences to put this argument to bed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forteh Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Indeed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy P Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Surely you cant compare rocket powered vehicles (thrust etc.) for top speed and accelleration as theyre not 'cars' in the sense that you can actually drive them anywhere.Round a circuit an F1 car is faster than motoGP, but then it costs a lot more and is a lot more aerodynamic, bikes are crap for aerodynamics unfortnately. A veyron tops 250mph, a naked turbo busa does about 220 (see ghostrider) so stick a fairing on and you may well be getting up to the same sort of speeds.I couldnt say which is quicker in a drag, again are you counting rocket powered or vehicles that the like of you and me can actually drive on the road?I'm not comparing Thrust for acceleration. Among the fastest accelerating cars is a Top fuel dragster - yes its not a road legal car but its a more traditional car in the sense that it has a piston engine that delivers its power through the wheels transfering that power to the ground. Find me a similarly powered bike that will complete the 1/4 mile in sub 4 seconds passing at over 300mph. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forteh Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 I'm not comparing Thrust for acceleration. Among the fastest accelerating cars is a Top fuel dragster - yes its not a road legal car but its a more traditional car in the sense that it has a piston engine that delivers its power through the wheels transfering that power to the ground. Find me a similarly powered bike that will complete the 1/4 mile in sub 4 seconds passing at over 300mph.Fair comment, top fuel cars are about as driveable in the real world as top fuel bikes As steve said, too many variables.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 I wonder why we don't see any motorbikes with rotary engines... The power to weight of one is better than an ordinary engine. It would give you a massive advantage in the MotoGP, and for road use the bike could be lighter with a smaller engine for the same power, making it a lot easier to ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OD404 Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 I wonder why we don't see any motorbikes with rotary engines... The power to weight of one is better than an ordinary engine. It would give you a massive advantage in the MotoGP, and for road use the bike could be lighter with a smaller engine for the same power, making it a lot easier to ride.There's one in developement now, a friend is one of the lead designers for it (not sure if I can say much more than that at the moment, haven't talked to him in a while)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy P Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Yep, loads of variables - But cars are better I did type out a massive edit for my post above but lost it. Here's a compressed version - Veyron is a factory production car - ghostriders turbo 'busa is tuned.Car has 4 wheels and tyres, bike has 2. Of course the car is more expensive - theres loads more of it. What about £'s per kg?Can't peanalise a car because it has the aerodynamic ability to produce useable downforce - thats part of the package that a car has to offer vs the bike.I wonder why we don't see any motorbikes with rotary engines... The power to weight of one is better than an ordinary engine. It would give you a massive advantage in the MotoGP, and for road use the bike could be lighter with a smaller engine for the same power, making it a lot easier to ride.There have been race rotory bikes in the past. The problem they has was classifying cc's to race them against piston bikes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forteh Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 (edited) Sound so gorgeous edit:Veyron is a factory production car - ghostriders turbo 'busa is tuned.Could the veyron be tuned further though to double the power output as was done with the busa? Edited December 3, 2009 by forteh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 There's one in developement now, a friend is one of the lead designers for it (not sure if I can say much more than that at the moment, haven't talked to him in a while)...Sounds good... it makes perfect sense.I remember someone telling me about one a long time ago that was so powerful it wheelied whenever you came out of a corner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy P Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Could the veyron be tuned further though to double the power output as was done with the busa? With an 8 litre 16 cylinder producing "just" 987bhp I'd say yes relitively easily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shamus Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 surely a rotary engine will have a dramatic effect on gryoscopic forces? isn't gyro forces why they reduced the size of the R1 brakes a year or two back, as they had an adverse effect on handling?i guess they could do the trick yamaha (and i think most other GP bikes) do and run the engine reverse to the wheel rotation to counteract it?either way those nortons sound lovely. and a lighter rotary could do mad things in the hands of a pro racer!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forteh Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 surely a rotary engine will have a dramatic effect on gryoscopic forces? isn't gyro forces why they reduced the size of the R1 brakes a year or two back, as they had an adverse effect on handling?i guess they could do the trick yamaha (and i think most other GP bikes) do and run the engine reverse to the wheel rotation to counteract it?either way those nortons sound lovely. and a lighter rotary could do mad things in the hands of a pro racer!!I would have thought that the reciprocating mass of a crank/rod/piston is far higher than that of a rotary. Reducing unsprung mass (particularly on the wheels) does make a massive difference to handling. The new husaberg motors are actually rotated forwards 90 degrees to move the COG higher dramatically alter the inertia of the bike, people aliken them to 2 strokes now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 surely a rotary engine will have a dramatic effect on gryoscopic forces? isn't gyro forces why they reduced the size of the R1 brakes a year or two back, as they had an adverse effect on handling?i guess they could do the trick yamaha (and i think most other GP bikes) do and run the engine reverse to the wheel rotation to counteract it?either way those nortons sound lovely. and a lighter rotary could do mad things in the hands of a pro racer!!The force produced from a rotary engine would result in a smoother ride... When an ordinary egine runs the pistons go up and down, this shakes the engine in the same direction - it's the reason 4-cyliners fire in 1-3-2-4 order, or similar - if they fired in 1-2-3-4 order the engine would shake it and the vehicle apart. A rotary engine will produce centrifugal force.As for gyroscopic effect, I shouldn't think it would be significant enough to make the bike unable to corner. Rotary engines are tiny, because they're so powerful.It would be interesting to see if you could take the engine from a mazda (I'm told they have two rotary engines that work together, around 700cc) and put it in a motorbike. Seeing as motoGP is restricted on engine displacement, a 700cc would be massively more powerful than a 2 or 4 cylinder engine They'd probably make it so you'd have to run maybe a 300cc engine for a rotary - think of the weight saved! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OD404 Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 The force produced from a rotary engine would result in a smoother ride... When an ordinary egine runs the pistons go up and down, this shakes the engine in the same direction - it's the reason 4-cyliners fire in 1-3-2-4 order, or similar - if they fired in 1-2-3-4 order the engine would shake it and the vehicle apart. A rotary engine will produce centrifugal force.As for gyroscopic effect, I shouldn't think it would be significant enough to make the bike unable to corner. Rotary engines are tiny, because they're so powerful.It would be interesting to see if you could take the engine from a mazda (I'm told they have two rotary engines that work together, around 700cc) and put it in a motorbike. Seeing as motoGP is restricted on engine displacement, a 700cc would be massively more powerful than a 2 or 4 cylinder engine They'd probably make it so you'd have to run maybe a 300cc engine for a rotary - think of the weight saved!But a rotary has twice as many power-strokes per crank revolution which is the reason the ACO banned their use at Le Mans, and why the DVLA and insurance companies class them as twice their actual capacity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forteh Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 But a rotary has twice as many power-strokes per crank revolution which is the reason the ACO banned their use at Le Mans, and why the DVLA and insurance companies class them as twice their actual capacity.Damn two strokes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 But a rotary has twice as many power-strokes per crank revolution which is the reason the ACO banned their use at Le Mans, and why the DVLA and insurance companies class them as twice their actual capacity.Yeah... I guess cause they've got twice the power, it makes sense. Isn't that the same as a 2-stroke? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OD404 Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Damn two strokes It isn't a two stroke as the intake and exhaust events are kept separate... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simpson Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 People saying bikes for straight cars for corners, if you know how to corner and are confident then a bike will do a car all day long in the corners. Prime example clean country lane lots of tight twisty corners the bike will be long gone as it accelerates so much quicker out of the corners and can go through them a lot quicker then most cars on the road.You corner a bike totally different to how you corner a car though, with a bike you have the tinyest contact with the ground, your front and rear tyres never have more than a 5p sized coin contact with the floor, you brake hard early and accelerate out of a corner, in a car I would argue you brake a lot later, can carry more speed round the corner, but not pull away as quickly afterwards. In terms of fastest Moto VS Grand Prix, F1 will win everytime, when your comparing thrills for 10k a bike is superior. In a road point to point race say 10 miles on roads, a bike will win everytime. Its just such an unfair comparision because for £10k you can buy a brand new Fiesta Style but you can get a top of the end Yamaha R1 "ready to race" bike, near £50,000+ would have to be spent on a brand new car and upgrades to make it anywhere near as quick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forteh Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 It isn't a two stroke as the intake and exhaust events are kept separate...I know, its the same effect though, twice as many powerstrokes per rev.I reckon someone should do an IL4 2 stroke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OD404 Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 On the face of it, it would appear a good idea, but the 2stroke does have limitations. It's speed for instance is limited due to the scavenging requirements, which can be overcome by using valves on the intake side (and possibly a little super/turbocharging to help), but then you run into dynamic constraints as the valvetrain is operating at twice the speed of a four stroke engine.Toyota did look into this and I think quite a while back they actually made a 2stroke for automotive use, but it wound up being no better for performance than the equivalent 4stroke, but more expensive and less reliable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forteh Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 On the face of it, it would appear a good idea, but the 2stroke does have limitations. It's speed for instance is limited due to the scavenging requirements, which can be overcome by using valves on the intake side (and possibly a little super/turbocharging to help), but then you run into dynamic constraints as the valvetrain is operating at twice the speed of a four stroke engine.Toyota did look into this and I think quite a while back they actually made a 2stroke for automotive use, but it wound up being no better for performance than the equivalent 4stroke, but more expensive and less reliable.In other words rotary is the future! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.