"Cans" Vs Bikes

[RiderInBlack]

Just Shit Stirring Here, But was reading the NZ Motorcycle Trader which stated that the Production Superbikes were 5 seconds faster per lap than the V8 Touring Cars at the last meeting on Manfeild:finger: .

This got me to thinking if (like some on other forums claim) "cans" corner better than bikes and can go as fast as bikes, why are the bikes doing better time around our tracks?:Pokey:

Is this true for other tracks around the World?

PS: Could replies to this quote track times (on what track, including track distance) and class of vehicle (Formula Ford, V8, Superbike, 600cc Sports Production, etc.).

[pete376403]

You'd have to analyze each section of the track seperately, but I think it comes down to there are more straights than curves. There is no denying that bikes have far superior acceleration to cars - even V8 supercars, and even or better top speed. So the cars "average" speed around the track might not vary as much as the bikes, but the bike makes up the cornering speed difference a lot quicker, ie gets back up to speed sooner. Braking I'm not sure about, don't know if the cars can brake later and harder or not.
My theories anyway, based on the fact I have never ridden a really fast, late model bike on the race track (or the road, for that matter) ! :laugh:

[Motu]

It's been proved countless times before - a bike just can't match a car with 4 huge feet for braking,corner speed and exit,regardless of down force.Bikes will generaly pull more top end and may get there quicker,if down force comes into it the car pays a huge price,it takes HP to push that down force.The F1 cars can do much higher speeds than you see,but are so light they would have no corner speed with the wings taken off.

[Devil]

Just recently had the chance to fly around pukekohe in the passenger seat of my mates racecar (see attached, pre-signwriting). With slicks on, the harness isnt just in there for accidents! The brakes/grip/cornering is insane.
FYI, this car has bike rotors on it ;)

This thing should be heading round pukekohe around 1.04s when its all sorted.

[merv]

[font=Comic Sans MS][size=3][color=blue]Just Shit Stirring Here, But was reading the NZ Motorcycle Trader which stated that the Production Superbikes were 5 seconds faster per lap than the V8 Touring Cars at the last meeting on Manfeild

Don't know the numbers but V8s at Manfeild are only the NZ version and are fairly low spec versus the Aussie V8s that are about to hit Pukekohe.

At the highest levels of the sport whether we like it or not cars are generally quicker e.g. F1 versus MotoGp.

[Wenier]

You might find that the V8 Supercars are slower because they are quite large (whale like if you will) and lose traction out of corners easily, whereas if it was say the GT3 or GT2 porchse or a Ferria the bike could easily get done over.

[Skunk]

Don't know the numbers but V8s at Manfeild are only the NZ version and are fairly low spec versus the Aussie V8s that are about to hit Pukekohe.

At the highest levels of the sport whether we like it or not cars are generally quicker e.g. F1 versus MotoGp.

One of the F1 drivers (forget who) was watching the MotoGP in Italy and said that the bikes were much quicker between corners. Overall lap times were about the same but the F1 cars had 30+ kph on the straights.

Also said the bikes were more interesting to watch... :whistle:

[Coldkiwi]

yeah, its an interesting topic. You're right about the top speeds because the ducati GP bike was only 1mph off the fastest F1 cars top speed at Catalunya a few months ago during a test.

a balanced/lightened car should brake quicker than a bike too.
so all in all, if you're racing a car, make sure you get to the braking zone well ahead and hog any form of line thats available before buggering off to the next corner :)

[RiderInBlack]

This thing should be heading round pukekohe around 1.04s when its all sorted.
Big deal, Ray Clees does Puke in 57 sec:moon:

[RiderInBlack]

if it was say the GT3 or GT2 porchse or a Ferria the bike could easily get done over.OK, but have you got stats on that? I like some facts here not just talk. Porchse race on our tracks. There has to be some times. Formula Fords will beat a Porchse around our tracks (have seen a demo). What are their track times?

[RiderInBlack]

Formula 1 are built only to race. They are not production vehicle. Would have to compare them to something simalar in bikes (a Britten for example).

[Two Smoker]

I saw this car on the 17th???? of march doing testing at puke, looked fast, wasnt pushing it hard though, fucking loud as....... With Puke hasnt Stroud broken into the 56's?????

[Motu]

Formula 1 are built only to race. They are not production vehicle. Would have to compare them to something simalar in bikes (a Britten for example).

Isn't F1 and MotoGP close enough for you? As Merv and I have pointed out cars just cream the bikes,it comes down to how many wheels,simple as that.They reckon the MotoGP bikes are capable of putting out 300hp,but they would be unridable.How about drag racing? no corners,downforce or any of that crap - just go for it for a few hundred metres....uh uh,cars again.

Lets just be satisfied that the bikes can get to the corners faster.

[RiderInBlack]

Ok Motu. But drag racers are no good around the track. My queiry was if "cans" are better at cornering and can go faster, why are bikes doing better track times?

Do you know track times for F1, V8, etc vs GP, Superbikes, etc?

By the way, do not the GP in MotoGP stand for General Production?
F1 is not General Production.

[Motu]

This subject has been discused on every board around the world.

http://forums.atlasf1.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=67674

MotoGP is a new formula,the GP stands for Grand Prix I would think.It's very hard to compare cars and bikes from different formulas,but F1 and MotoGP are the pinacle of 4 and 2 wheel.I mentioned on another thread how they tested a WSB Ducati and Wayne Gardners Commodore on 6 Aussie tracks and got a 50/50 split,the bike faster on the high speed tracks,the car faster on the tight tracks.

[FROSTY]

does it really matter? --fact is the bikes are a heck of a lot more fun to watch -Ya have a hard time making a bike 20 feet wide like a car can

[Lou Girardin]

F1 cars would still have a huge amount of mechanical grip even without downforce, they have lots of rubber for their weight.
GT3 Porsches, etc. are nowhere near V8 supercar times on any track.
I seem to recall that F1 is approx 10 secs faster than MotoGP on the tracks they share.

[RiderInBlack]

Thank Lou. That is the sort of info I was after here.

Thanks for the link and info Motu. I thought our tracks were tight not fast (we don't have very long ones at any rate). How do they compare to oversea's tracks? How well would "cans" go on Isle Of Man TT coarse?

[RiderInBlack]

MotoGP 2003 - Malaysian Grand Prix:
Fstest Lap, Valentino Rossi 2'02.480 ~ 163 Km/h

F1 2004 - Malaysian Grand Prix
Fastest Lap, J.P. Montoya 1'34.223 ~ 212 Km/h

Quoted from the link Motu provided. Lots of interesting discussion relating to this topic in that link! Thanks again Motu.

[RiderInBlack]

Another good link relating to this discussion.

Montoya visits Suzuki pits
For the Spanish MotoGP

Montoya, who drives for the British based Williams team, spent time chatting with both Suzuki riders, comparing the performance of his car, the FW24, with their bikes……

http://f1.racing-live.com/en/index.html?http://f1.racing-live.com/en/headlines/news/detail/020508040953.shtml

[scumdog]

Does anyone know if the fact a car is wider than a bike means it can't "straighten" the corners so much, means the bikes should have a higher entry/exit speed or is that just a "theory"?
'Course a bike doesn't handle the "ripple-strip" the same! :whistle:

[Devil]

Big deal, Ray Clees does Puke in 57 sec:moon:
Does he race a 1600cc n/a engine?
(I have no idea who that is)

[RiderInBlack]

Does he race a 1600cc n/a engine?
(I have no idea who that is)
No, a GXSR1000. This time was clocked while he was racing at the Puke TT I marshell at earlier this year.

[Devil]

No, a GXSR1000. This time was clocked while he was racing at the Puke TT I marshell at earlier this year.
Yeh well, good on him. Apples and Oranges and all that.

Said "can" = 600kg, 1600cc n/a. So a 1:04 would be pretty damn good for something with 4 legs.

Uhm re: GT3 time, last I saw @ puke was about 59.5 fastest lap.

[RiderInBlack]

Uhm re: GT3 time, last I saw @ puke was about 59.5 fastest lap.
Not bad. Difference could be put down to driver/Rider skill and track knowledge.

Remember being told track time improves in order of these factors:

First most important is the Rider's skill and knoweledge.
Then the right tire for the conditions (traction, part one)
Then suspension (traction, part two).
and a late fourth motor power.
I am sure that something about brakes should be added to that list.

[Devil]

Not bad. Difference could be put down to driver/Rider skill and track knowledge.

Remember being told track time improves in order of these factors:

First most important is the Rider's skill and knoweledge.
Then the right tire for the conditions (traction, part one)
Then suspension (traction, part two).
and a late fourth motor power.
I am sure that something about brakes should be added to that list.

ARRRG NO BRAKES!
heh. In the race car, before they got the power sorted out (they couldnt get enough fuel in) he only had to use the brake pedal once over the whole track. grip!

That GT3 race was the carrera cup series?? With Jim Richards and co. Uhm, couple of weeks ago.
Good thing about that series is the cars are practically all the same, not a huge amount of power.

[merv]

Also said the bikes were more interesting to watch... :whistle:

That I agree with wholeheartedly and basically can't be bothered watching F1 or IRL or CART on TV.

[Drew]

Just recently had the chance to fly around pukekohe in the passenger seat of my mates racecar (see attached, pre-signwriting). With slicks on, the harness isnt just in there for accidents! The brakes/grip/cornering is insane.
FYI, this car has bike rotors on it ;)

This thing should be heading round pukekohe around 1.04s when its all sorted.
OK, this car is purpose built, and pretty trick, if it will run a 1.04 at Puke, it is still two seconds slower than our freind "the travelling YO show", on his old gixxer 6.
However, cars do have a higher average speed, due to there traction enabled corner speed.
But nomatter how you look at it, it takes more skill to ride a bike at pace, and that makes them cooler.
As for cars... :whocares:

[Devil]

OK, this car is purpose built, and pretty trick, if it will run a 1.04 at Puke, it is still two seconds slower than our freind "the travelling YO show", on his old gixxer 6.
However, cars do have a higher average speed, due to there traction enabled corner speed.
But nomatter how you look at it, it takes more skill to ride a bike at pace, and that makes them cooler.
As for cars... :whocares:
I dont know who you're arguing with.

[MacD]

Here's a short video of a bike vs F1 car race (http://www.iiii.geek.nz/media/race.asf)...

Doesn't prove anything but it does have a bike and a car on the same race track ;)

[RiderInBlack]

Does anyone know if the fact a car is wider than a bike means it can't "straighten" the corners so much, means the bikes should have a higher entry/exit speed or is that just a "theory"?
'Course a bike doesn't handle the "ripple-strip" the same! :whistle:
Was thinking of the width factor today, which may explain the faster bike times on our narrow tracks.

I also was curious as to the angles of forces being applied to the tyres as a bike is cornering. As you lean the bike:ride: over you shift it's centre of gravity to the inside edge of the corner. The centrifical force is trying to throw the bike of the outside of the corner. Would not the act of these 2 forces increase the weight pushing the tyres onto the track, and thereby increase traction?
Wouldn't you get this effect on the outside tyres of a "can", but loose it on the inside tyres (just got thought of this as my old ute pitched and roll as I rounded the corner:sweatdrop )?
Anyone here good at Bike Physics?

[Lou Girardin]

I don't know physics, but I do know that it's centrifugal force (weight) that eventually makes any tyre let go. Which is why heavy cars don't corner as fast as light ones, given equal rubber.
Lou

[Drunken Monkey]

Does anyone know if the fact a car is wider than a bike means it can't "straighten" the corners so much, means the bikes should have a higher entry/exit speed or is that just a "theory"?
'Course a bike doesn't handle the "ripple-strip" the same! :whistle:

This is offset by the physics of all single track vehicles = under braking and acceleration, a single track vehicle (ie motorbike) tends to want to stand up. Strictly speaking, a car can be braking until the tightest point of the corner, then accelerate as it opens. A bike has to brake, pass through the apex at constant speed, then accelerate out. Not entirely true in practice -try putting the brakes on in a heavy car while in a corner - oops! But we all know it's even worse pulling on those front discs while you're dragging your knee!
Ultimately the reason has been covered: more rubber = more grip.

[Drunken Monkey]

I don't know physics, but I do know that it's centrifugal force (weight) that eventually makes any tyre let go. Which is why heavy cars don't corner as fast as light ones, given equal rubber.
Lou

Yes, you don't know physics ;) There's no such thing as 'centrigual force' = its a layman's term used to describe things to kids. The correct term is centripedal acceleration, but let's not go into that. (where are those 'pedantic bastard' html tags when you need them??)

*ahem*

Terminology aside, you hit it right on the nose. Any given mass that moves has momentum (cf a stationary mass = inertia). The more momentum an object has, the harder it is to enact a force on it, in this case, acceleration (yes, turning is an acceleration - a 'vector quantitiy') in another direction.

And I thought I forgot all my high school physics...

[Grumpy]

Years ago now I was involvedin Superkart racing. We ran Rotax 250cc engines, no suspension but awesome brakes.

We raced at Cemetry curcuit a couple of times and around the tight circuit the top lap time from the karts smashed the bike Formula 1 lap record and it was a few years before the bikes got near it.

Another time I was practicing at Baypark....when there was a Bayprk that is...and the Tuaranga bike club were there too. I was out on the track with a racebike, a 1100 something. I can't remember what. I could practically run around the outside of it around the sweeper and leave it for dead out of the corners but it would get me down the straights although I would nail it under brakes.

The lack of weight and good traction were a huge advantage.

I have to say though, after racing at cemetry I gained a hell of a respect for the guys doing it on bikes. It was hard enough doing it on 4 wheels let alone 2 and I have to say the bikes sure looked more exciting than the Karts.

[FzerozeroT]

top gear did this between an R1 and a Porche Carrera 4, the Carrera won by a second, and they complained that "being a four wheel drive will make it slower in the dry" - never mind the fact that you could by ten R1's for the price.

[RiderInBlack]

Ultimately the reason has been covered: more rubber = more grip.OK, given that more rubber = more grip, trikes & sidecars should hold better on corners than bikes:Pokey:. Do they:spudwhat:

[Motu]

Pushing us a bit here eh? Still comes down to contact patch - the side car will still only have the one front wheel for braking and one rear for drive,with more weight to stop and push,so they are slower for a given capacity,but they can use aerodynamics - a sidecar brake if used is only used to set up corners and keep the bike straight under braking.

A trike may have more traction on the drive wheels,but still only one front wheel for the extra weight.In the 60s some guys pushed the sidecar rules when they used a Mini powerplant with one rear wheel,rider and passenger sitting side by side.Of course they cleaned up and were promptly banned.

[RiderInBlack]

Pushing us a bit here eh?----
In the 60s some guys pushed the sidecar rules when they used a Mini powerplant with one rear wheel,rider and passenger sitting side by side.Of course they cleaned up and were promptly banned.
Yep:D But look at the good info I am getting out of you dudes:2thumbsup

Racing rules alway amuse me. On one side we use it to develope our machines, but if someone comes up with something really good, we make a rule against it to make things "sporting" (or to favour a group). This slows down (or stops) improvements in the area. Think of the advances we would have in windpower if they had less rules governing say the America's Cup! F1 would real have got the ground effect down pat!
With bikes, 4's (or more) would get better without the breather restriction. OK, just shit-stiring again.

[wkid_one]

I don't know physics, but I do know that it's centrifugal force (weight) that eventually makes any tyre let go. Which is why heavy cars don't corner as fast as light ones, given equal rubber.
Lou
Biggest differentiating factor is the aero package the cars are running - this will make any car corner well - at the expense of increase drag however.

Race teams spend more money and time on setting the cars/bikes up than anything else - they have the luxury of hundreds of hours of testing and hundreds of gigabytes of telemetry - telling everything that the car/bike is doing.

The unfortunate thing is for bike - whilst part of it is a rubber on the road issue - their biggest downfall is the complete and utter inability to use aerodynamics in corners. And in fact - their complete disregard for aerodynamics full stop. Bikes create next to no downforce - therefore don't use air to create any traction advantage what-so-ever. Also - next to Truck Racing - they are some of the most inefficient aerodynamic vehicles racing on the planet today.

The flip side is that they can accelerate quicker as they don't need to overcome the friction of downforce. Don't be fooled in to thinking a bike is quicker in a straight line than an F1 Car - it is only because, in race trim, the F1 Car is having to overcome over 1 tonne of downward pressure acting as friction on the road. However - this is offset somewhat by the bikes incredibly brick like aerodynamics.

[Motu]

The dust bin full coverage fairing was banned in the late 50s,early 60s - I wonder how far down the aerodynamic road bikes be be now if they had been allowd to develope further?

[wkid_one]

I think they would probablt resemble what you see at Bonneville

[Big Dog]

Just to stick my oar in.....
If you make it a ratio of dollars spent per kmph the R1 is 10 times faster, given it is a tenth of the cost and only seconds slower..... and that is cost price not development cost.

Also the largest limiting factor on a bike tends to be the skill of the rider, in a car it tends to be the size of their balls.

[Lou Girardin]

Granted, bikes CD figures are not great, but their CDa (co-efficient of drag x area is better than most cars. Thats why a Hyabusa only needs 180 hp to hit 300km/h, compared to a 550 Maranello's 550.

[wkid_one]

My exact point Lou - the car is utilising downforce - which in turn creates friction - BUT - means it can wickedly out corner a motorcycle.

A car has to overcome both forward friction against the air - and downward friction against the road - whereas - a bike only has to overcome forward friction (for which it has a smaller frontal area). Bikes don't utilise downforce.

[RiderInBlack]

Stupid question, but could you design them to? Would there be an advantage in it?

[marty]

Granted, bikes CD figures are not great, but their CDa (co-efficient of drag x area is better than most cars. Thats why a Hyabusa only needs 180 hp to hit 300km/h, compared to a 550 Maranello's 550.


ONLY 180hp????

[pete376403]

Granted, bikes CD figures are not great, but their CDa (co-efficient of drag x area is better than most cars. Thats why a Hyabusa only needs 180 hp to hit 300km/h, compared to a 550 Maranello's 550.
Leaving aside the HP for a second, the bikes Cd is probably ok on its own, but terrible when the rider is added.

[georgedubyabush]

Stupid question, but could you design them to? Would there be an advantage in it?

Isn't that part of the idea behind the Britten?