Para82

Yup a Turbo will smoke most bikes - especially if it's been reflashed at 600hp+ That kind of power is just nuts. I had a 725 hp Shelby Mustang and it made fast cars and fast bikes look like they were going in reverse everytime lol.

Racetwin2

Mostly high spec Mercs and BMW:s. C63 AMG, A8 etc. Most of the cases not with the owner but usually the owners younger 20:ish son behind the wheel. Preferably with a freind in the passenger seat.

Not long ago i was actually overpowered by a 991 Turbo S. I didnt see him behind but when I opened the convertible top at the red light I could see that it was a Porsche behind and the daughter of the driver sitting beside him was pointing at my car and smiled while the top was opened and just for the sake of it he decided to nail it passing me on the right at Mach 2 when he was exiting the motorway. I drove at a normal pace I should add. Sunglasses on......

We dont have many US muscle cars or monster pickups in Europe yet even though they are increasing in volume.

Edgy01

No one.

Carmichael

I beg to differ. I had a mildly tuned '03 GSX-R 750 that I used to walk on a Ford GT from 65-140 MPH once. That was "just" a 750.

My brother had a ~380 lb '04 ZX-10R street/track bike that dynoed at 175 RWHP ... I cannot fathom anything faster than that thing was. I could have sworn it power-wheelied in 4th gear when you hit the powerband at well over 100 MPH.

Bikes are in a different realm when it comes to acceleration. Top speed, not so much ...

Then there are corners.

SpeedyD

In a street race, from a dig, the turbo will smoke bikes because of consistency of launch, and getting consistent 3.0 0-60mph times. Even liter bikes can't do that, unless every biker is a pro biker on a perfect surface... even then... unlikely.

I know quarter mile times for a range of bikes, and the fastest are going to be just under 10 secs, on a drag strip, with roll-out, with a pro rider. Liter bikes will tend to do mid 10s in quarter, and around 3 secs to 60mph. A biker can't match the consistency in a real street race of PDK launch control. Even in "optimal vs. optimal" situations the turbo s will take the vast, vast majority of liter bikes.

Link to give some context:
http://www.sportrider.com/tech/sport...rmance-numbers

Note also the 60-80mph times (so a "pull" on the hwy)... even the fastest here take much longer than a turbo s would to get from 60-80mph. I think Clarkson quoted one second (believe that was incorrect) but in reality it is sub 2 secs...

From a roll the advantage leans towards the bikes a bit, and will depend on what speeds etc. Clearly liter bikes will take turbos from a roll at "middle" speeds... they will also take veyrons, etc.

That's why I said "most sport bikes" from a roll... and from a dig for liter bikes. I am pretty nuanced I guess in how I type, but it is intentional. Most sport bikes will lose to a turbo s, on the street, dig or no dig. Most sport bikes are in the 600cc range.

Most liter bikes will run away from a turbo from a roll, so long as starting from a decent but not too high speed...

DC911S

Some bikes, like the special edition 1000RR BMW with the race shifter and launch control electronics will definitely give even the Turbo 911 a run for it money from a launch. With a skilled and big-balled rider.

better late than never

Mustangs!

Typically they want to race in 45 mph zones with many cars, red light and speed cameras and plenty of places that cops could be lurking. These are the same guys that almost wreck at Cars and Coffee fish tailing! An accident waiting to happen in most cases since they typically fail control their crude vehicle! A true Gentlemen knows when and where to race.

Carmichael

The term "sport bike" is a bit amorphous ... My SV650 is a "sport bike", but it barely cracks 80 BHP.

That said, I think you are correct, SpeedyD, cars may have the edge on acceleration from a dig, unless you have a lowered and stretched out bike (which are lame, by the way).

However, I think bikes still hold a decisive acceleration and speed advantage up to what, 170+ MPH?

Certainly a topic that has been debated and bandied about time and again.

Quadcammer

beating a modern liter bike from a roll requires way more than a standard 911 turbo. You'd need a solid 700rwhp to even get close.

SpeedyD

Quote from my post: "From a roll the advantage leans towards the bikes a bit, and will depend on what speeds etc. Clearly liter bikes will take turbos from a roll at "middle" speeds... they will also take veyrons, etc."

My from a roll comment was sport bikes generally. Most sport bikes on the street are around 600cc, with the most common being 650cc. And, yes, absolutely a turbo s would take a 650cc sport bike from a roll at nearly any speed.

Liter+ bikes are the high end of sport bikes for straight line performance and, yes, again like I said, they'd generally take a turbo from a roll. I can't even say always here, because if you look at quoted acceleration times, a turbo s will beat some liter bikes between certain speeds. A really fast bike will beat almost any car at acceleration from 100mph-~150mph because that is where power to weight is most critical vs. other key elements (traction, ability to put down power vs. flipping the bike, aerodynamics, etc). Even then, on the street, minor road imperfections are a helluva lot more dangerous to someone on a bike than a car.

I don't think most of us are in disagreement overall... the original post was that the guy beat most bikes he raced. I think someone else assumed he drives a standard carrera... but he has a turbo s (2011). His statement therefore absolutely made sense... most bikes someone would encounter, including most sport bikes, will be slower than a turbo s... from a roll, dig or otherwise... especially on a public road. From a dig, in fact, he would beat virtually anything out there to 60mph in real world conditions...

SpeedyD

No, they will beat the turbo, never mind giving just a run for the money... :-)

But out on the street and not drag strip... 95% of the time the car with launch control will do better than the typical street racer.

The bike is faster, the car is more consistent and easier to launch.

DC911S

If I was to get a bike it would be the BMW HP4 1000RR. But my wrist says no after many bike crashes and races.

Carmichael

Disagree. Although there are exceptions, most sportbike/replica racers are 600 or 1000cc (I still lament the passing of the 750ccs). These are your "garden variety" GSX-R xxxs, CBRxxxRRs, ZX-xxRs, YZF-Rx from the "big four" Japanese bike manufacturers, Suzuki, Honda, Kawasaki, Yamaha, respectively.

Most of the new 600ccs are pushing 100++ BHP. The 636cc ZX-6R is approaching 120 BHP. Sopping wet with a full tank, the bike weighs in at 422 lbs sans-rider.

Some armchair maths puts that at .270142 horsepower per pound without a rider. A 997 Turbo S, at 530 horsepower divided by the lowest curb weight I could find, which is 3,494 lbs puts the Pcar at .151688609 horsepower per pound.

With a 140 lb. rider, the bike would still have .20284 horsepower per pound.

Even a ZX-6R would take it, all things being equal.

Yes, aerodynamics, gearing, atmospheric conditions, alignment of the planets, tides, and what driver or rider may have had for breakfast will sway these results one way or another. But I still maintain a bike would be faster.

(yes, it's a slow day at work).

Jaye Bass

Mustangs, Mini-Vans, Raptors, Challengers, Civics, Corollas, Mercs, all those nasty BMW's, Audis especially S and RS 5's. I have a 7.1S, so I really like it when a 335i wants to have a go...though it sucks to go against one that has been tuned. Stock to stock 335i's are tasty snacks.

Oh and Subies, lots of Subies...new age ricers.

Racetwin2

My first bikę was a Kawasaki GPZ 500 Ninja. 200 kilo. 60 crank hp. 0-60 in 4.9sec. And 206 km/h top speed. Nothing compared to current sport bikes.

http://motoprofi.com/motospecspictures/kawasaki/gpz_500_s-1991.html

So the performance of a bike is really outstanding 0-60. but as someone said cornering is something else.