performance of a 250 4 stroke

[Voodoo]

Now im looking at getting my bike licence, been riding dirtbikes for awhile and want to hit the road, anyway, sounds like a 250 4 stroke would be the go,
just wondering what kind of performance to expect from the likes of cbr250's zxr? 250's etc , ive heard they can do around 180kph , but what about pickup, 0-100 ,400m etc?

[Zapf]

hello,
havne't ridden a 250 I4, but I have ridden with a few. And I can tell you that the 250 VTwins have a better mid corner speed and better up hill, due to more torque. And its easier to ride on :)

ask away if u want to know more.

Zapf

[John]

down low the torque is nice, most 250 4's have awsome pickup - its when they get to 150 they loose pull and you need abit of a straight to wind them up, but off the mark you will abliterate all the 'overboosting wastegate dragging along the road types' (in civics, and a majority of modern cars for that matter)...

trust me plenty of pull in a 250 around town :P

[Skunk]

Now im looking at getting my bike licence, been riding dirtbikes for awhile and want to hit the road, anyway, sounds like a 250 4 stroke would be the go,
just wondering what kind of performance to expect from the likes of cbr250's zxr? 250's etc , ive heard they can do around 180kph , but what about pickup, 0-100 ,400m etc?Good enough to start with... and then you want more. (Had a ZXR250, went to ZXR400 as soon as I could.
Then to a ZX6R later. <_<

[Storm]

I'd back John on that one. I havent got it in me to abuse my clutch as much as some blokes here, but I can usually get away from the light pretty damn smartly, and I can cruise at 100-130 at will. Your questions might prompt me to get off my butt and do a 400m time trial.
Have to say, its quite a cool feeling on my gixxer when the exhaust valve opens up and I can just hold one gear through 40 km upspeed :banana:
Also, most importantly, you can really give a 250 heaps without losing your license as easily :2thumbsup

[Two Smoker]

CBR's and ZXR's etc should be good for 14 second flat 1/4 mile times.... and 0-100 in about 6 seconds....

Top speed about 180ish...

Plenty of power....

[mikey]

89 cbr250R hurricane VERY LIMITED edition (not many with no fairings an bits of cop car white paint on em!) not sure on how accurate speedo is but mine pulls 200, i have measured out an put a mark on speedo as speedo stops at 180 but needle keeps going up. but does take a while to wind up an thats in 5th i think? will have to ccheck

[Monsterbishi]

but off the mark you will abliterate all the 'overboosting wastegate dragging along the road types'

sport 250's just feel and sound quick, against anything with a turbo that's even been vaguely tweaked, they'll look daft...

My old 1400kg Galant vr4, stock everything with the boost nudged up a few psi, did a sub 5 second 0-100...

[Jonty]

The ZXR's and CBRR's take a bit of winding up. They feel like most 250 twins till about 12K rpm then they will take off (up to 19Krpm). Mine tops out at around 180 -190 and around 6 sec to 100kph.

If you are coming from a dirtbike (like I did) then these will be your best bet other than a 2 smoker. Good bikes to learn on as they are light and you can flick them into corners easy as. I agree that you will very soon want something bigger after one of these, so careful how much you pay :2thumbsup

[inlinefour]

I think if a 250cc bike can do the speeds as quoted above then it has to be pretty impressive. My RD250LC (yes two stroke) could only do 183km/h (about). :shit:

[John]

sport 250's just feel and sound quick, against anything with a turbo that's even been vaguely tweaked, they'll look daft...

My old 1400kg Galant vr4, stock everything with the boost nudged up a few psi, did a sub 5 second 0-100...
still havent met a car that could bet a pathetic twin off the mark, if It wasnt broken I would come and demonstrate... when I get another one I'd take you up on your offer *happily*

:P

[mikey]

I race evos an wrxs until about 120 then pull back as bike accelerates rather slow from there, they get shat upon!

[k14]

In my experiences some cars (especially 4wd like wrx's and evos) will beat a 250 across an intersection, but as soon as they are about to change into 2nd they are left behind in your dust.

I'll be taking my cbr in the drags on friday night at mere mere so I will be able to tell you the 400m time (although i'm a very major novice).

Also I am selling my cbr soon and will be bringing it down to chch in 2 weeks if you want to check it out.

[Voodoo]

Cheers for the info guys, well 0-100 in 6secs is pretty good, yeah some turbo cars can do that with abit of tweaking , but the likes of standard evo's subbies etc, a 250 sounds like it would give them a scare, plus proberby plenty enough for my first road bike, as ive only got a 125 2 stole mx'r

K14, let me know how ya get on at the drags, and if im looking for one when ya down, i might have to take u up on that offer

[k14]

Yeah sure, I will be give you a PM if you want when I am down.

I dragged a fairly highly modified (from the looks, big bore, bigger intercooler etc) evo 3 a few months back and as I said, he beat me over the intersection but then I was ahead and he didn't gain on me till I started slowing down.

The highest I've had my cbr up to is 170 and that was at ruapuna, at the end of the straight (1300m), so that gives an idea of what it takes to get these things up to 180+. Also I would have been coming onto the straight doing 80ish or so kph.

[Monsterbishi]

still havent met a car that could bet a pathetic twin off the mark, if It wasnt broken I would come and demonstrate... when I get another one I'd take you up on your offer *happily*

:P

I'll probably be doing some events in the N.I next year with my new car, I'll wind the boost right down to 12psi, and add 400kg of ballast, will be more than happy to put paid to the dreamers that think they stand a chance against a turbo 4wd.

Look at it this way, by the time we hit the 60', I'll already be at least 0.2 ahead, come half track, I'll be over a second ahead, come the traps, around 1.5 seconds.

With the exception of 2 stroke 250's, I've never seen a 250 run a 13 second pass before.

[John]

i dont even want to reply.

[onearmedbandit]

Why not?? He has a point.

[John]

Why not?? He has a point.
no I was going to reply but I dont want to upset anyone.

[Monsterbishi]

Please, upset us, it'll be a nice change from enduring one of WINJA's capitalised posts...

[MrMelon]

I remember having a bit of a drag against what sounded like a big turboed external wastegated vr4 with speedtech stickers all over it last year when I was on my tzr. He had me off the line, but I caught up by the time he got into 2nd and it was fairly even from there. I'd say he'd be capable of high 12 1/4's so that's not too bad for a little 250.

[Voodoo]

so are the zxr,cbr etc, suitable for long trips , like from what ive heard a gsx is more of a cruiser, but would a zxr,cbr be just as suitable, as id prob like to do the odd long day trip etc, and how far would a tank get u?

[Monsterbishi]

My MC19 CBR250R, is good for 195k's before the reserve is needed, don't know how far the reserve is good for though...

If you're anywhere past 5'10" The CBR gives a more upright riding position because of the low pegs, so is long trip friendly with less weight on your arms/wrists.

[Atomic]

I agree with Monsterbishi, its not hard to get a huge amount of power to the ground with a tuned 4wd turbo car. When the 4WD worked on my 32 GTR it launched very aggresively (9k + side step clutch) and didnt stop sucking you into the seat well....it didnt stop sucking you back at all untill id run out of motorway and/or off throttle cause it didnt feel too stable at those insane speeds. Then when the 4WD crapped out and it was running rear only (95% of its life), I would say it would get crapped on by bikes up untill about 100-150kph, not because it was slow...just because you couldnt get the power to the ground! It would break traction in 2nd gear (and 3rd when flat shifting) under power and in the wet would even light the bags in 5th gear under power (Scary).

The R wasnt even highly tuned, only intake, exhaust, chip and 1.0bar boost.
There is no way a 250 is gonna get a powerful 4wd sports car off the line and if it did start to gain......150kph and the bikes running out of puff while the car is just climbing.

I have attached a pic of my 250 killer.
If you ever see one of these on the road, believe me that it will kick your 250s ass.....it will accelerate harder, brake harder, corner harder and have almost twice your topend.

Bikes are still great! Cars suck!!!

Naa, I also love cars.

[muzz]

The missus has a GSF250 bandit it's a quick little bike. Really picks up speed after 8k rpm has a top speed of 180kph at 17k rpm. She rode from welly to hamilton and said it was compfy not to many aches and pains. She sat on 120 to 130 most of the way getting about 180 k/tank of fuel. I'd say not a bad little machine for a first bike. She's had it for just over a year now she wants something bigger. Shes had a taste of duc and now she wants one. :niceone:

[muzz]

Here's a picture of the little beast.

[crazylittleshit]

Weazle/velox rides a jade250 and keeps up with everything good riding position etc etc....................
you may want to look into something like that?

:done:

[justsomeguy]

I agree with Monsterbishi, its not hard to get a huge amount of power to the ground with a tuned 4wd turbo car. When the 4WD worked on my 32 GTR it launched very aggresively (9k + side step clutch) and didnt stop sucking you into the seat well....it didnt stop sucking you back at all untill id run out of motorway and/or off throttle cause it didnt feel too stable at those insane speeds. Then when the 4WD crapped out and it was running rear only (95% of its life), I would say it would get crapped on by bikes up untill about 100-150kph, not because it was slow...just because you couldnt get the power to the ground! It would break traction in 2nd gear (and 3rd when flat shifting) under power and in the wet would even light the bags in 5th gear under power (Scary).

The R wasnt even highly tuned, only intake, exhaust, chip and 1.0bar boost.
There is no way a 250 is gonna get a powerful 4wd sports car off the line and if it did start to gain......150kph and the bikes running out of puff while the car is just climbing.

I have attached a pic of my 250 killer.
If you ever see one of these on the road, believe me that it will kick your 250s ass.....it will accelerate harder, brake harder, corner harder and have almost twice your topend.

Bikes are still great! Cars suck!!!

Naa, I also love cars.

Man that is a lovely car!!!!!!! :done:

But comparing a GTR to a 250 is like comparing a Corolla to a R1.

I think you should compare a 250 to say a basic skyline or integra, etc maybe the odd civic type R.


=================================================



As to your question Voodoo.... I find my (slow to most people) ZZR fast enough once I cross 8K in 2nd,3rd and 4th. Matter of fact I rarely cross those rpm/speeds while keeping it legal. In 6th around 8-10K (depending on hills, etc) is all you need for legal 110kmph cruising.

Lots of people however point very firmly at the CBR's and ZXR's so go give them a test ride and decide......... only true way to find out if you ask me:2thumbsup

[Atomic]

Man that is a lovely car!!!!!!! :done:

But comparing a GTR to a 250 is like comparing a Corolla to a R1.

I think you should compare a 250 to say a basic skyline or integra, etc maybe the odd civic type R.


Thanks for the comments, I no longer own the car but will own another someday.

GTRs are pretty fantastic but there are plenty of other cars that keep up with the same mods so I dont think its just a GTR that would pose a threat to the 250s.....plenty of other 4wd turbos would smoke them aswell.
My mates ZR4 (180ishKW)was stock (more power than a stock VR4 (140ishKW) and that thing was pretty damn fast, so fast id say that it would piss on a 250 4 stroke. Then EVO3s (fastest EVOs) which are faster than a ZR4 would most likely smoke a 250 aswell unless the driver is taking it easy out of fear of running the rider over. GTIRs would kill the 250s also I reckon.
Even RWD sports cars, aslong as the driver can get it moving without smoking the bags too hard, MR2 turbo or RX7 turbo would mince a 250.

[Monsterbishi]

Thanks for the comments, I no longer own the car but will own another someday.

GTRs are pretty fantastic but there are plenty of other cars that keep up with the same mods so I dont think its just a GTR that would pose a threat to the 250s.....plenty of other 4wd turbos would smoke them aswell.
My mates ZR4 (180ishKW)was stock (more power than a stock VR4 (140ishKW) and that thing was pretty damn fast, so fast id say that it would piss on a 250 4 stroke. Then EVO3s (fastest EVOs) which are faster than a ZR4 would most likely smoke a 250 aswell unless the driver is taking it easy out of fear of running the rider over. GTIRs would kill the 250s also I reckon.
Even RWD sports cars, aslong as the driver can get it moving without smoking the bags too hard, MR2 turbo or RX7 turbo would mince a 250.

As far as cheaper performance cars go pretty much anything that can run a 13 second 1/4 will trounce a 250, so even the likes of the 1800NA Type-R Integra's can do it, VZ-R, VR4/ZR4's, GSR's, GTiR's, GT-X's, SW20 Turbo, Any of the Turbo'd skylines.

And for the record, ZR4's were never any more powerful than the same year VR4, that was a fallicy started by a australian magazine, they're actually 30kg heavier because of the extra bracing at the back of the car. - Your friend may have had one of the Evolution models which carried the 16g turbo...

I had to ride my MC19 for a few days last week while the bike shop fixed my reserve switch on the YZF, so I used it as an opportunity to practice my launching, even with a perfect launch, ie, slip-launch around 10-12krpm no bogging, it was nothing even close to what my old VR4 could do, and my new Mirage is even quicker on the same setup.

[Atomic]

Cheers for the info Monster, I hadnt realized that was a case with the ZR4.
My mates was possibly an EVO 0, im not sure!?
Pretty quick.

I guess any car capable of running in the 13sec bracket (which is alot of cars) is going to hose a 250 considering they would be lucky to run 14s.
And after 150kph the 250 is running out of go and the cars still pulling.

But at the end of the day......... :whocares:
This is a bike forum and no one wants to hear me talking cars so Ill
shut up now.

250s are plenty of fun for non full licenced riders and who should be riding a
rocket whilst there learning.
My FZR250 gave me heaps of fun and excitment and now I ride a 150!!!

Whats the deal with Prilly RS50's? Why would anyone build a full size 50cc racer?!?! CRAZY!

[Voodoo]

yes most of those cars are capable of running 13's even 12's but standard a vr4 wont, nor will a type R , nor will a GT-s skyline, nor will a......blar blar blar


but yes, a turbo cars can be modified with ease to get those figures unlike a bike (well, though i dont know enough about bike to say) 250 with Nos maybe?


but id be happy with a 14sec bike , ill leave the 13 sec's for my supercharged 84 trueno

[Sniper]

Yea my bike can do 100.
I dont speed, I think its bad for the road and against the rules. YEAH RIGHT!!!!

My CBR without the governor :whistle: can pin about 210kph. Dont know why or how but thats what I have been told, never had it faster than 170kph, the roads are too short

[limbimtimwim]

... sounds like a 250 4 stroke would be the go,
just wondering what kind of performance to expect from the likes of cbr250's zxr? 250's etc , ive heard they can do around 180kph , but what about pickup, 0-100 ,400m etc?

You don't want a CBR or a ZXR, the bike you want is a Honda VTR250, post 1998 model. I have one of these.

I went on a motorcycle rally late last year. (Himatangi -> Akitio beach ) I was one of the first 35 or so there out of about 400 . Suprised? Not as much as I was. I was the first 250cc there by a long way.

I think the VTR250 is better than the CBR250 or the ZXR250 for several reasons. It has a seat a real human can sit in (I rode around NZ for a bit over 2 weeks and survived, but I did spend a day in bed afterwards). The ZXR is really nasty in that respect.

It doesn't look like a 250, unless it is parked next to something bigger :-) .

The engine does not need to be thrashed to get a result, you can putter around without thinking too much about what gear you need to be in. Or you can change down (Probably two gears) and pass anything that doesn't have turbo and more than two wheels.

The engine is not very grumpy, and doesn't rev like crazy, when it's cold.

Tyres are the same size as the CBR250, which is big enough. USD front forks. Single drilled front disc, which is easy strong enough and doesn't heat up badly.

Face it, a 250 four stroke isn't going to go quickly, you are stuck with being slower than every other bike, bar the postmans, in a straight line, and even being blown away by the quicker rice rockets. You can, of course, go faster than everyone else round the corners. Which is the beauty of the thing.

So you may as well get the one you can live with (The VTR) or just harden up and get and a two stroke. The CBR250 and ZXR250 are a weak middle ground made for the (I think maybe gone now..?) Jap licence rules that meant going past a 400cc bike wasn't worth the hassle. So they made 250s that looked like their 900s. However, both the ZXR and CBR can do nearly 200km/h, but the VTR is only good for about 150. Blame that on no fairing and different gearing.

Save up big $$ and get an Aprilia RS250... Ooohhhh... <Dribble>

[Storm]

MMMM RS :yeah:
I'm gutted that I missed the chance to ride one at my local anza dealership and rip me a new set of ring-gear

[Sheep Dags]

and if you've got the patience and the spare cash, the 2 strokes will never disappoint! I've had an NSR 250 and a TZR 250 and they were both great bikes. But even though they're 2 strokes and they're faster than a 4 stroke 250, they don't stand any chance next to a turbo sports car. My mate had a stock mr2 (non turbo) and the NSR (1989) was pretty much the same speed, the TZR however (1991) owned the mr2 quite nicely. I'd doubt they could stand up to, say, a GTR or an EVO, and if the 2 smokes can't, there's no way a 4 stroke will.

but anyway, you wanna learn how to ride before you wanna go dragging off sports cars, so go the 4 stroke (simply because they're not so stressful!) and learn to ride it well, then when the time is right, go to a 600 or something, and you'll own them all!



go the 2 smokes!

[Timber020]

Yeah what sheep dags said. My RGV's could make food of most cars, and didnt even have to try to embarrass 4st 250's. Its all down to power to weight as the 2 strokes are both lighter and more powerful.

Against faster cars Im not so sure, some have some real speed behind them.

[Monsterbishi]

Generally, a healthy RGV can dispatch anything with sub 200-ish wheel hp...

[vtec]

Ok, I have had a racing RGV250, an Evo IV (stolen), and still have a 200+hp Honda Prelude, and a 1990 CBR250RR.

My quartermile times are as follows.
Honda Prelude 14.86 @152k/hr
Honda CBR250RR 14.3 @ 147k/hr
and I hadn't dragged the other two.

I reckon the CBR has a 14 flat in it, as on the day that I took it, there was mud and crap on the track and I was skidding it up on take off (got to race an Elise with a K20a though). The prelude would do approximately 6.3 0-100k/hr. And you might notice that the trap speed is substantially higher than the CBR, but the CBR finishes over half a second ahead, what this tells me is that it is a lot faster 0-100 than the Prelude, which to me means it's getting close to 5.5seconds 0-100 on a crap day.

As far as having 2 strokes goes, they are a reasonably big responsibility, and you have to know how to look after them and you'll find that they aren't as nice for commuting as a four stroke, although definitely faster than the fourstroke (although nearly no flywheel weight so tricky to hook up off the line). 0-100k/hr the CBR would have been about equal with the Evo, so effectively they are up there with the best cars on the road, and it is really up to who gets the launch on the other one.

In short you can't go past the fun/reliability/cost of having a 250 fourstroke.

[imdying]

They're not fast in real numbers, and a 4wd turbo whatever will indeed have them if the driver has something other than space between their ears. An 89 CBR250 will never see 200. 400m times in the high 14s usually.

But that's all bollocks. They don't actually feel slow to ride, are awesome lapping roundabouts or your local scratching roads. They'll definitely keep you amused for the year it takes to get a full license (it's still a year these days?). I used to love borrowing the ex's ZXR250 and screwing f*** out it. No doubt about it, they're top fun.

[John]

yea a good low milage 4stroker will keep you occupied and satisfied, although imdying it takes 6months for learners - and I think 1year for restricted then you can go for your full, if you take a course you can get from restricted to full in 6months..

[imdying]

I forgot to add something that might be of value... the seats on ZXR250s are damn uncomfortable. 200ks (a tank full) and you'll be a cripple. Make sure the box is good, because you'll be dancing on it all the time. Definitley try an RGV if you can find one that isn't shagged (almost impossible in Christchurch).

[k14]

Ok, I have had a racing RGV250, an Evo IV (stolen), and still have a 200+hp Honda Prelude, and a 1990 CBR250RR.

My quartermile times are as follows.
Honda Prelude 14.86 @152k/hr
Honda CBR250RR 14.3 @ 147k/hr
and I hadn't dragged the other two.

I reckon the CBR has a 14 flat in it, as on the day that I took it, there was mud and crap on the track and I was skidding it up on take off (got to race an Elise with a K20a though). The prelude would do approximately 6.3 0-100k/hr. And you might notice that the trap speed is substantially higher than the CBR, but the CBR finishes over half a second ahead, what this tells me is that it is a lot faster 0-100 than the Prelude, which to me means it's getting close to 5.5seconds 0-100 on a crap day.

As far as having 2 strokes goes, they are a reasonably big responsibility, and you have to know how to look after them and you'll find that they aren't as nice for commuting as a four stroke, although definitely faster than the fourstroke (although nearly no flywheel weight so tricky to hook up off the line). 0-100k/hr the CBR would have been about equal with the Evo, so effectively they are up there with the best cars on the road, and it is really up to who gets the launch on the other one.

In short you can't go past the fun/reliability/cost of having a 250 fourstroke.

Totally agree with you there. People don't realise how hard it is to get a car into the 13s bracket and above. At mere mere a few weeks ago the fastest car did a mid 11 (and that was very far from being even remotely street legal) the fastest road car might have done a high 12 but if it did it was very highly modified. Most of the evo's etc that I saw were doing high 13's to low 14's, which is about what a 4 stroke I4 would do. So it definately comes down to who is better at launching off the line. I think the bike would be easier to get into the "sweet spot" due to no wheel spin etc, but if the car got it right then it would most likley win.

A few months ago I had a drag with an evo 3. He beat me across teh intersection but then i passed him and kept a 30m or so gap untill I started backing off (around 120kph). I think the main advantage of a bike over a car is the speed with which you can change gears. A car must take 5 or 6 times longer than a bike and that is the main downfall.

[TwoSeven]

One of the things to put into perspective is that the bike only cost about $5k and needs no mods - the car costs probably double that if you dont want one thats only good for the supermarket run.

I'm sure if you took the money you saved from not buying the car and spent it on a proper bike, you'll realise just how crap bolting a ton of steel to 4 wheels and a tank engine actually is. :)

[Monsterbishi]

Totally agree with you there. People don't realise how hard it is to get a car into the 13s bracket and above. At mere mere a few weeks ago the fastest car did a mid 11 (and that was very far from being even remotely street legal) the fastest road car might have done a high 12 but if it did it was very highly modified. Most of the evo's etc that I saw were doing high 13's to low 14's, which is about what a 4 stroke I4 would do. So it definately comes down to who is better at launching off the line. I think the bike would be easier to get into the "sweet spot" due to no wheel spin etc, but if the car got it right then it would most likley win.

A few months ago I had a drag with an evo 3. He beat me across teh intersection but then i passed him and kept a 30m or so gap untill I started backing off (around 120kph). I think the main advantage of a bike over a car is the speed with which you can change gears. A car must take 5 or 6 times longer than a bike and that is the main downfall.

ok, you need a reality check here, it takes sod all to send a turbo car into the 13's,and 12's are not that much harder, example:

My old 1989 Galant VR4 :- Rear muffler unbolted, interior stripped out, boost turned up to 14psi(2 over stock) 13.7@97.7mph

Friends '88 Galant VR4 :- Bigbore exhaust, pod filter, interior stripped out, decent clutch and boost upped to 20psi :- 12.9@103mph

Friends '92 Galant VR4 :- (Newer shape, v6 model) :- Rear muffler removed, pod filter, interior stripped out, stock clutch, boost upped to 18psi :- 12.7@107mph

Turbo skylines respond just as well to similar mods, as do Subaru's, it's all about the driver. Most of the cars I get to work on now with the local Mitsi club are all completely street legal, and can run easy 12's, my new car, the Mirage, will run 12's on it's factory 13" Steel wheels! (And cost less than $6k to build)

Evo's, GSR's, VR4's, heck, anything 4wd is a doddle to launch, you dial up the revs, and then step off the clutch pedal whilst mashing the gas pedal.

[Voodoo]

they are pretty good times, shows what a good performance package the Vr4 is, and so are evo's seen some good times outta those for bugger all mods , i would say though , ive also seen other 2l turbo cars (4wds included) have to sepnd quite abit to get those times, yeah maybe the driver is to blame, but in saying that, then most traffic light drags will have those same drivers

[k14]

ok, you need a reality check here, it takes sod all to send a turbo car into the 13's,and 12's are not that much harder, example:

My old 1989 Galant VR4 :- Rear muffler unbolted, interior stripped out, boost turned up to 14psi(2 over stock) 13.7@97.7mph

Friends '88 Galant VR4 :- Bigbore exhaust, pod filter, interior stripped out, decent clutch and boost upped to 20psi :- 12.9@103mph

Friends '92 Galant VR4 :- (Newer shape, v6 model) :- Rear muffler removed, pod filter, interior stripped out, stock clutch, boost upped to 18psi :- 12.7@107mph


And i'm sure all those cars can be used with those mods for the persons daily transport? Like I use my bike for?

[Monsterbishi]

They are all daily drivers, and quite driveable I might add, even those in our club in the 11sec brigade, most are street driven.

That's the great thing about Turbo cars, boost is easily controllable, both by a boost controller, and by careful pedalwork, so even quick cars can be street friendly, the one thing that makes a car less driveable on the street - is the flywheel/clutch setup, a lightweight flywheel means more rpm's are required to get the driveline moving, and clutches with less surface area - ie 4 puck brass button clutches(my personal favourite) make heavy traffic/intown driving a chore, but with the right combo of clutch'n'pressure plate, you can get the best of both worlds.

[John]

They are all daily drivers, and quite driveable I might add, even those in our club in the 11sec brigade, most are street driven.

That's the great thing about Turbo cars, boost is easily controllable, both by a boost controller, and by careful pedalwork, so even quick cars can be street friendly, the one thing that makes a car less driveable on the street - is the flywheel/clutch setup, a lightweight flywheel means more rpm's are required to get the driveline moving, and clutches with less surface area - ie 4 puck brass button clutches(my personal favourite) make heavy traffic/intown driving a chore, but with the right combo of clutch'n'pressure plate, you can get the best of both worlds.
oh yea like that one that plowed through the intersection and rolled a few weeks back and that one that killed those children and there mum..

Not an attack on you but I question why such things are on the road. And I'm pretty layed back about cars bikes and anything with an engine but there HAS to be a line somewhere.

[Monsterbishi]

oh yea like that one that plowed through the intersection and rolled a few weeks back and that one that killed those children and there mum..

Not an attack on you but I question why such things are on the road. And I'm pretty layed back about cars bikes and anything with an engine but there HAS to be a line somewhere.

You're just biased, that's all, pretty much any bike 600cc's and over can blow by a highly tuned sportscar, would you prefer those to be off the road as well?

It wasn't the car that killed the mother and children, it was the driver, if you can recognise this fact, then you'll understand the pointlessness of your post.

[CTM]

If we look at cost to performance, nothing can beat a 250. Cars cost heaps to modify and to get them to do a 14sec 1/4 mile will cost you alot more than a stock standard 250..... :banana:

[Sheep Dags]

plus who wants a stupid cage?!! a bike will not only compete with the cars on a straight but will fuckin WHOOP their arse in the twisties! :2thumbsup

[Teflon]

I would be suprised if those 250's put out 45hp at the wheel, maybe at the crank.

I'm sure my NSR put out around 45 to 50hp.

Just learn to ride the thing hard, who cares about hp figures, doesnt really matter in the real world.

[Monsterbishi]

If we look at cost to performance, nothing can beat a 250. Cars cost heaps to modify and to get them to do a 14sec 1/4 mile will cost you alot more than a stock standard 250..... :banana:

99% of 4wd turbo cars do a factory 14 second 1/4...

That's why I listed the three examples that I did, each car, including mods, cost less than $8k

[John]

99% of 4wd turbo cars do a factory 14 second 1/4...

That's why I listed the three examples that I did, each car, including mods, cost less than $8k
but for 8k you can get a alot of 250.

no 4stroke 250 puts out 45bhp, its all crank figures, and they are all 'over inflated' figures as well in most cases.

Just food for thought in the point your trying to make.

[TwoSeven]

lol. I suspect you may want to eat those words. Us 250 owners could probably show you reams of non-inflated dyno charts of cibby 250s putting out 45bhp at the rear wheel.

I tuned mine to 40bhp standard jetting/filter with a linear power curve, and I hadnt even started with performance mods.

Remember that many fast sports cars also get built with motorcycle engines - so it pays not to under-estimate the state of tune that bike engines can get to. For example the DAX Rush kit car uses a 350bhp turbo busa engine and only weighs 400kg.

[Atomic]

a bike will not only compete with the cars on a straight but will fuckin WHOOP their arse in the twisties! :2thumbsup

Dream on....

[John]

lol. I suspect you may want to eat those words. Us 250 owners could probably show you reams of non-inflated dyno charts of cibby 250s putting out 45bhp at the rear wheel.

I tuned mine to 40bhp standard jetting/filter with a linear power curve, and I hadnt even started with performance mods.

Remember that many fast sports cars also get built with motorcycle engines - so it pays not to under-estimate the state of tune that bike engines can get to. For example the DAX Rush kit car uses a 350bhp turbo busa engine and only weighs 400kg.
Sorry I was refferring to stock 4stroke 250s.

[XTC]

Christ.... who cares? one's a cage and the other is a 250cc learner bike both are sad in my opinion :banana:

[John]

but hes trying to say cars are better than bikes for racing and I resent that.

[Monsterbishi]

but hes trying to say cars are better than bikes for racing and I resent that.

There's nothing to resent, you certainly can't argue the clear fact that cars have better brakes, and more traction than bikes, and unless conditions are perfect for the bike, a car will out-corner it as well.

We all enjoy what we enjoy, it's rather shallow of you to resent someone else because of your own biased opinion.

[FEINT]

99% of 4wd turbo cars do a factory 14 second 1/4...



99% of "FACTORY" 4WD TURBO cars may be able to do a 14 second 1/4 mile. But they are in the HIGHER END of cars, where as 250's are just the beginning of the bikes. Higher end meaning compared to the 2.0L, 1.6L etc... We are talking about stock standard here.

[John]

There's nothing to resent, you certainly can't argue the clear fact that cars have better brakes, and more traction than bikes, and unless conditions are perfect for the bike, a car will out-corner it as well.

We all enjoy what we enjoy, it's rather shallow of you to resent someone else because of your own biased opinion.
yes, but I'm a spitefull wee man, I am not allowed to resent anything - although you can spoon feed everyone your own biased crap so shove it, see now I'm upset and NOW I'm being biased, BIASED TO CRAP.

And it all started with me saying that you can beat most cars off the intersection (unless all your cool cars, have the wastegate draging and are civics cool man your a real dude) i.e lights, then you made it the quarter mile, then your car came into it then you said turbo 4wheel drives, then you started stabing other people, I dont care what you like I like both - always have liked them, but if you want to propagate yourself for purpose of your 'superiour' car tuning and other 'stuff' then why do you havto complicate crap, why not say - I have a car, it is fast cool huh, STOP TRYING TO MAKE YOURSELF BIGGER THAN YOU ARE.

I'm 5'6 and have a fucken small dick and I dont find a need to make myself better than someone else.

[Timber020]

A 250 4 stroke is food to any half decent car. On road surface the car has you on the brakes and around the corners, which just leaves you only winning on the straight lines.
It takes alot more skill and effort for a bike rider to ride to the limit of his tyres in a corner and takes very little to throw him. Recovery of composure of a bike once its gone to far is very tough and injury rates from any bin while going at full noise is huge.
From the start your average performance car is inherently more stable, has better grip and composure on the picks and through the bends and even if they stuff up a bit the chances are they will be able to reel the cage back into line. Esp if its a 4wd.

[NordieBoy]

My quartermile times are as follows.
Honda Prelude 14.86 @152k/hr
Honda CBR250RR 14.3 @ 147k/hr
and I hadn't dragged the other two.

My Nordie did 14.1 @ 147k/hr and just beat a Suzuki Goose (worked dr350 single with a skinny bugger riding).
Was also just beating a stock KDX 200.
Dunno what my 250 would do but I think you'd have to use a calander to time it (geared to max speed of 100kph or so).

[TwoSeven]

Lets do the math for a cbr250RR

Taking the claim that the prelude does 14.86@152 and comparing that to a cbr250rr (standard as measured on the dyno).

Said bike has a 72km/hr 1st gear, 102km/hr 2nd gear, 128km/hr 3rd gear and 152km/hr 4th gear. So to hit the preludes speed of 152km/hr you'd have to change to 4th gear on the CBR and rev it out.

Normally riding this bike you short shift 2nd and 4th if you were doing a max speed run (and please dont try it unless on the track), but if you just short 2nd and hold 4th out to 17500rpm, you'll beat that car - still with another gear to go (its 6 speed, but the speed limiter can be hit in 5th).

In fact I would expect to see a standing quarter time with a speed of about 176km/hr if everything was done properly.

You can do the math for what the time should be. Since 1/4 mile is only 400 meters, 176km/hr is 48.8 m/s so means you could in theory do it in 8.18 seconds (although not from a standing start).

There are factors that add to this time.

One such factor is the 0-100km/hr time. The critical time is 4.2 seconds - times under this are normally theoretical calculations as this is the point where the rear tire will start to spin (it means the driving force will be greater than traction allows for) - its a subjective measurement as its based on normal road tires and road bikes - luckily the 250 has a time greater than that (its a little over 5 seconds) so it wont spin its tires.

This also means that it will be in 2nd gear at the time its hit 100kph, so you can add 0.5 seconds for a gear change to that.

However, I happen to know from testing the bike that its maximum acceleration can't be done at more than 12.5k rpm in 1st and 2nd due to the fact that the bike will wheelie, meaning you lose time and speed. In fact, being forced to limit the revs means you lose 30km/hr off of each gear so a rough calculation means about 36.39 m/s or a 400m time of 10.99s.

As I said before, its about 0.5 for each gear change and you have to allow for throttle pickup, so thats about 1.5 seconds (3 changes) so a time of 12.49 would be good.

So a 12-14 standing 1/4 time is pretty respectible for said little bike.

Out of interest the cbr600F2 will do that speed in 2nd gear at 15,000 rpm and I happen to know that its 0-100 time was given at about 4.8s. Racing starts are done at 10.5k rpm (which lifts the wheel in the air by about 1m) so you literally short 1st into 2nd straight away, then rev it out. Since there are 3 less gear changes involved, it should be closer to 11.5 seconds. A quick google around shows people claiming elevens and twelves - so the math is in the ballpark (although I know not correct).

One day i'll get round to working out the buggering around facter and see how much of a percentage of the 1/4 mile time it actually works out to. At a guess, 152km/hr is 9.47s for 400m, so 14.3-9.47 = 4.6s used up in acceleration and buggering around.

[k14]

you're not going to get anywhere near 176kph on a 400m run. if i remember correctly hoon was just doing over 150 on his zxr400 and he was doing 12.9's. i think 140 to 150 is a better bet.

[Coyote]

Lets do the math for a cbr250RR

Taking the claim that the prelude does 14.86@152 and comparing that to a cbr250rr (standard as measured on the dyno).

Said bike has a 72km/hr 1st gear, 102km/hr 2nd gear, 128km/hr 3rd gear and 152km/hr 4th gear. So to hit the preludes speed of 152km/hr you'd have to change to 4th gear on the CBR and rev it out.

Normally riding this bike you short shift 2nd and 4th if you were doing a max speed run (and please dont try it unless on the track), but if you just short 2nd and hold 4th yaady daady da, so on, so forth
I'm going to have to find some of that out for myself :devil2:

[TwoSeven]

Do it safely on the next track day :)

[Teflon]

There's nothing to resent, you certainly can't argue the clear fact that cars have better brakes, and more traction than bikes, and unless conditions are perfect for the bike, a car will out-corner it as well.

We all enjoy what we enjoy, it's rather shallow of you to resent someone else because of your own biased opinion.

I've heard that before too.

Road cars carry alot of mass, so logic tells me a 160kg bike will corner faster than a 1 1/2 ton car.

[Atomic]

I've heard that before too.

Road cars carry alot of mass, so logic tells me a 160kg bike will corner faster than a 1 1/2 ton car.

Remember that while the bike has about 10mm or so of each tyre contacting the tarmac the car has anything from 800mm to a meter or more.....thats a hell of alot more grip.

[Fluffy Cat]

More tyre more grip yeah and nah car weight bike weight?.Yeh the car will have more grip but there are some more variables weight suspension etc.Anyway you guys have the wrong 250.You need some thing with more power like an NSR 250 sp or any of the 2 strokes.The 4 stroke 250s are just play bikes.If you don't belive catch me at the next tracktime or a practice session at Puke.FC.... :niceone:

[Monsterbishi]

Road cars carry alot of mass, so logic tells me a 160kg bike will corner faster than a 1 1/2 ton car.

Mass/Weight are relative to traction, as has already been posted, I just measured the contact patch on my YZF, about 7cm all up, at 300kg's including Rider(Yes, I'm a big bugger), that's 42.85kg/cm - compared to my Mirage, with very cheap street 195/60/15's - which have 44cm all up, car is 1240kg including me which makes 28.18kg/cm, to achieve the same ratio, I'd need to add another 650-ish kilo's to the equation.

[Atomic]

Mass/Weight are relative to traction, as has already been posted, I just measured the contact patch on my YZF, about 7cm all up, at 300kg's including Rider(Yes, I'm a big bugger), that's 42.85kg/cm - compared to my Mirage, with very cheap street 195/60/15's - which have 44cm all up, car is 1240kg including me which makes 28.18kg/cm, to achieve the same ratio, I'd need to add another 650-ish kilo's to the equation.

I wouldnt think your bike would have 70mm when cornering!?
The contact width would be bugger all when your at the tyres limit.....after all
we are comparing cornering performance so you would need to base this on
a bikes tyre contact area at full lean. More like 10mm id guess.

Excuse the mm, being a chipie I find CM just looks wrong!! Cant help but add the extra 0.

[XTC]

you'd be throwing your bike away every corner if it only had the contact patch of a 10 speed. 10mm...

[Atomic]

you'd be throwing your bike away every corner if it only had the contact patch of a 10 speed. 10mm...

Are you forgetting that a motorcycle tyre is circular?
A 10 speed has a tyre not much wider than 10mm but it certainly does not have 10mm of contact. Just as a motorcycle does not use its 90 - 180mm of rubber, as my bike is sitting on its stand in the garage there is only 20mm of rubber touching the ground and thats not pushing it to its edge at full lean.

[Monsterbishi]

the YZF has some good sized rubber, 180/55/17 on the rear 120/70/17 on the front, I went with 7cm just to be kind to the bikes, it's probably less in real life, but I wanted to give the bikes a fighting chance in the stats...

[vtec]

I think the start of this argument is about road accleration of the 250 vs turbos, and having had experience with both, I think I can sum it up fairly unbiased, my evo IV vs my CBR250RR 0-80k/hr would be about the same, and yes the evo was modded although running standard boost. Around about 5.5 0-100 for both. After 100k/hr the bike is not in the picture though, so as the argument was initially about on the road acceleration I think it's fair to say that the 250 4stroke is definitely worth having... And my RGV would have comfortably beaten both. 400m and the speed gets too high for the 250 four stroke, so its not a fair comparison for road driving.

And as far as cornering goes, my evo had Teins and could out corner the bike probably most of the time except for chicanes, cause the bike doesn't have to go as far.

[flyin]

I drive a 1.3L rwd corolla wagon (ran a 17.917 at 119kms :spudbooge ) and could probly skin most big heavy turbos over piecocks! :bleh: !
spent sum time nd money on suspension, brakes and tyres!
(plus a few lessons on how to drive it...... :niceone: ...)

i reckon i could beat myself on my ZZR250 now tho!... on a good day purely cos its got more pull outa corners and thers so much less weight to transfer through the chicanes.
a sweepers a diff story but throwing it round i like the bike! :ride: !

however the supersticky rubber means my rolla will (safely) do similar times in the wet with gravel etc on th road...... while staying warm and dry........crankin th beats.......
pity its in the shop for a while.............. :bye:

hang on i've got a bike outside and its sunny............. :D

[TwoSeven]

ha ha..

I drive a carina wagon, all of 2.0 of them there litres. I reckon it could top your corolla wagon any day. I'd be on for a 20s 1/4 which must be better coz the numbers are bigger :)