Power to weight of a Ferrari | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Power to weight of a Ferrari

Forum Sponsor
Part of the reason bikes don't get way better fuel economy than cars is because of their poor aerodynamics. Sure, they are quite a bit better, but not nearly as good as they should be for their size and weight compared to a car.
 
Last edited:
mma01 said:
Out of curiosity, what kind of et/traps does a 250 get at the drag strip?
Click to expand...

No clue in hell...what is et/trap? I ride the Ninja 250 and have only been to the regular track, no drag strips.
If I get a good launch at 4-5k rpm its fast enough than most cars to 90-100 km, which is awesome in city combined with its nimbleness. The cars that can keep up are the AMG's, M's, all the other performance models....
On the highway you're balls out past 145 and slowly climbing. The fastest I've had my on GPS was 173 km/h in ideal conditions.
I'm going to download a Speedo app that will track 0-100 times and stuff like that, will post up some numbers soon.
 
I suggest you go read up on the subject as that is a 2002 article. Times have changed. The 2012 stock Corvette ZR1 runs faster than a stock 1000 bike. ZR1 ran 2 seconds faster than the MV Agusta F4 even when the Corvette ran for 20,600 m while the bike only went 19,100 m at the nurburgring. If you still think stock for stock, a bike is faster then go modified car vs modified bike. Modified car will dust a modified bike on track. Numerous lap time comparison between ALMS GT cars vs world superbike and cars are more than 2 seconds faster. If you go prototypes then cars will completely destroy bikes. F1 cars will run laps around MotoGP bikes.

If you want first hand evidence, go take your 1000cc bike and go race the Speedstar GT-R at Mosport or Shannonville. He is from Markham so go to the shop and ask to race against his GT-R with your 1000cc and show me how your 1000cc bike is superior to cars on the track.



murf said:
Not too many production cars have enough downforce to speak of. Take a stock Corvette or GTR vs a stock superbike and see what happens at a racetrack.
I suggest you go read up on the subject:

http://www.southbayriders.com/forums/showthread.php?t=608
Click to expand...
 
The reason for my question was to find out what actual owners of 250 ninja's are getting at the drag strip. According to the road tests I have seen posted online, a 250 ninja gets anywhere from high 14's to mid 15's in the 1/4 mile, which means it is quite a bit slower than any v6-equipped mainstream family sedan (i.e. camry, accord, altima, etc) which are generally running low 14's these days.

LoneRonin said:
No clue in hell...what is et/trap? I ride the Ninja 250 and have only been to the regular track, no drag strips.
If I get a good launch at 4-5k rpm its fast enough than most cars to 90-100 km, which is awesome in city combined with its nimbleness. The cars that can keep up are the AMG's, M's, all the other performance models....
On the highway you're balls out past 145 and slowly climbing. The fastest I've had my on GPS was 173 km/h in ideal conditions.
I'm going to download a Speedo app that will track 0-100 times and stuff like that, will post up some numbers soon.
Click to expand...
 
So was this thread basically about people with 250's wanting to feel superior to people with a Ferrari?
 
mma01 said:
The reason for my question was to find out what actual owners of 250 ninja's are getting at the drag strip. According to the road tests I have seen posted online, a 250 ninja gets anywhere from high 14's to mid 15's in the 1/4 mile, which means it is quite a bit slower than any v6-equipped mainstream family sedan (i.e. camry, accord, altima, etc) which are generally running low 14's these days.
Click to expand...

All I can vouch for is my Accord V6 feeling slow as hell off the line and to about 85 km compared to my bike.
My dad's new Benz E-350 which is pushing a bit over 300 horses is a lot more responsive, especially in sport mode. But lights to lights I'll usually win everytime. Once that thing is in its powerband though it takes off quick for a big V6.
 
On an 1/8th mile, the small bike may have a chance, but speeds get too high in a 1/4 and the bike will completely run out of steam (maybe even before the 1/8th is up).

People must be really bored. There are an incredible number of bike vs car tests from around the world. On any test I have found that includes acceleration, braking and corners, the bike always loses (normally by a lot). If you just look at 0-60, most bikes have a good shot against most cars (obviously not comparing a 250 to a reventon), as the test becomes more demanding, bikes get demolished.
 
I don't know how some can argue against fact. The numbers are the numbers. Power to weight is a widely looked at ratio. Depending at what motivates you to ride will be the contributors to what bike you end up with. My cbr125 is getting 85 us mpg plus and is a 13 hp bike. The cbr250 is claiming @ 23 hp 70 to 80 mpg. When I ride I am up against cars on the road, not bikes. Having a performance edge on 90% of cars is acheivable with the ninja 300. To me that is what matters. Who cares if certain cars are better performers at 150 kph plus. Anything above that you lose your license. Hands down the right bike will own the road from 0 to 150 kph.
 
jetspeed said:
I suggest you go read up on the subject as that is a 2002 article. Times have changed. The 2012 stock Corvette ZR1 runs faster than a stock 1000 bike. ZR1 ran 2 seconds faster than the MV Agusta F4 even when the Corvette ran for 20,600 m while the bike only went 19,100 m at the nurburgring. If you still think stock for stock, a bike is faster then go modified car vs modified bike. Modified car will dust a modified bike on track. Numerous lap time comparison between ALMS GT cars vs world superbike and cars are more than 2 seconds faster. If you go prototypes then cars will completely destroy bikes. F1 cars will run laps around MotoGP bikes.

If you want first hand evidence, go take your 1000cc bike and go race the Speedstar GT-R at Mosport or Shannonville. He is from Markham so go to the shop and ask to race against his GT-R with your 1000cc and show me how your 1000cc bike is superior to cars on the track.
Click to expand...

Bikes are a bit faster since 2002 me thinks.
Nurburgring??? Lol, sure pick a track that is deadly to motorcyclists......self preservation wont slow them down a bit.
The MV Augusta record you speak of was in 2008.
I ride Mosport every year thanks. Do you, or just your "friend"? If you did you'd know
Bikes and cars dont mix. A stock 600 will run 1:27s.
What does a stock GTR do? This guy managed 1:37, but at 6/10s lol. Couldnt find much else, but with a good driver sub 1:30s are possible but certainly wouldnt smoke a SS.

http://www.e46toronto.ca/forums/archive/index.php/t-13530.html
on street tires, the car was so composed, so comfortable, so flat and relaxed the driver was basically saying you point this thing and shoot. he was driving it maybe 6/10th's at the most and we were turning 1.37's

Maybe 1:37 for a GTR isnt bad:
http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index...-be-gtr-brake-upgrade-experience-and-journal/
 
Last edited:
daught said:
Oke LOL you are trolling... RIGHT?


Do you realize that your draft situation actually proves MY point? 66% increase in top speed while drafting proves your faired bike isn't that aerodynamic.
Click to expand...

How do explain nascar? Cars that don't team up and draft will fall beyond the point of continueing the race. Your point is pointless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom