Kibosh3
Well-known member
Just for fun- How much horsepower/ what car would it take to be as fast as a new model SS:
- 250
- 600
- 1000
- 250
- 600
- 1000
|
|
|
How Much HP?
- Thread starter Kibosh3
- Start date
B
Bigevildoer
Guest
Really depends on the bike.
Easiest thing to do would be choose a bike (hp can vary pretty widely - even in stock form), get the specs and do the power/weight ratio calculation. Do the same for the car. Done deal.
What kind of 'fast'? 0-60? Quicker to the 1/4 mile? Or top speed?
It takes a seriously fast car to beat a supersport off the line and to the 1/4 mile... but it takes a lot less HP for the car to outrun the bike in a top speed run. A Z06 for instance would lay a spanking on any liter bike.
It takes a seriously fast car to beat a supersport off the line and to the 1/4 mile... but it takes a lot less HP for the car to outrun the bike in a top speed run. A Z06 for instance would lay a spanking on any liter bike.
Not quite. I see drag cars (i.e. Chevelles, Mustangs, Camaros, etc.) with less than 800hp do the 1/4 mile in ~10 seconds. A 'busa with a much better power to weight ratio can barely touch that.
Besides, "fast" is not the same as "quick". There are plenty of cars that are just as fast or faster than a bike due to superior aerodynamics, but bikes are almost always quicker 0 - 60.
HP isn't the only defining factor in how fast a car can go.
A 200hp properly geared car will beat a 500hp brute-force-quick-off-the-line car in the long run any day.
If you want a better comparison, pick a bike as a starting point, find it's top speed in a spec sheet somewhere and then look for three cars that have the same top speed and do an average of their horsepower.
That should somewhat answer your question.
*edit* Of course I am assuming you are talking about top speed on a really really long closed course.
A 200hp properly geared car will beat a 500hp brute-force-quick-off-the-line car in the long run any day.
If you want a better comparison, pick a bike as a starting point, find it's top speed in a spec sheet somewhere and then look for three cars that have the same top speed and do an average of their horsepower.
That should somewhat answer your question.
*edit* Of course I am assuming you are talking about top speed on a really really long closed course.
Last edited:
Prince
Banned
As written here already, it's all about power to weight ratio.
Lamborghini vs Aprilia:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ4tdGVBJts
Lamborghini vs Aprilia:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ4tdGVBJts
Except "power" is measured in HP which doesn't tell you much depending on how you define "fast". For example, I find a vehicle with lots of low down torque and therefore quick acceleration off the line feels "faster" than a vehicle with a really high revving engine that has a high top speed.
But if you're just talking top speed (which I guess we would since "fast" is generally in reference to speed and not acceleration) then the bikes are going to lose to a lot of cars. Even my diesel Jetta would do 200 kph so that would be faster than at least a 250.
But if you're just talking top speed (which I guess we would since "fast" is generally in reference to speed and not acceleration) then the bikes are going to lose to a lot of cars. Even my diesel Jetta would do 200 kph so that would be faster than at least a 250.
I have pushed my SV to 213, but I have a fat arse weighing in at 205lbs lol. Previous owner (my buddy) said he's pushed it to almost 230.
I pushed my '88 5.0 to 245kmh in Québec a few times.
That defies the people who posted here saying it's all about power-to-weight ratio.
Also, having lived around racing (my father did it for a while), I can definitely assert you that the driver's weight makes an impact on performance.
Most stock car racing series have a minimum weight for different classes. It's easy to shave weight off a stock car so therefor drivers weigh their car, weigh themselves and then add bricks inside their cars to make up the different in order to meet the minimum. This also allows you to distribute the weight around the car the way you want.
Most stock car racing on oval track is counter-clockwise, so the bricks go behind the driver's seat.
250 is about 30hp and would be more like a stock civic
600-110hp = 400hp camaro
1000 - 160hp = 600hp corvette
I said top speed, not "performance"
If you take two identical cars one without passengers and one with 5 people crammed inside, the cars will still have essentially the same top speed. The difference is negligible.
In fact, in some cases extra weight is beneficial to achieving super high speeds because it helps prevent lift. Those crazy land speed record "cars" weigh 10 tons.
Last edited:
yee_boys69
Well-known member
Ill bring out the srt is someone wants to bring a smaller bike and we can find out. 
Ill bring out the srt is someone wants to bring a smaller bike and we can find out.
Which SRT?
Kibosh3
Well-known member
hmmm, you think 250 is comparable to a stock civic? ... most v6's would be faster then?
I see your point. Can I pick your brain a little more for the sake of my edumacation?
With wind out of the equation for a moment, you're saying that if I max my SV at 250 while solo, I should hit the same while 2-up? That's adding another (let's say) 150lbs to a bike that is rated at 436lbs wet, plus my fat 205lbs.
My logic is naturally telling me that there should be some sort of impact on top speed because the engine has more weight to carry, more work to do. In your example with the cars, would you agree that the one packed with people will take longer to get to top speed?
Perhaps it's the acceleration factor that is making me think the top speed would be different.
Hmmm...you learn something every day!
dblEspresso
Well-known member
I see your point. Can I pick your brain a little more for the sake of my edumacation?
With wind out of the equation for a moment, you're saying that if I max my SV at 250 while solo, I should hit the same while 2-up? That's adding another (let's say) 150lbs to a bike that is rated at 436lbs wet, plus my fat 205lbs.
My logic is naturally telling me that there should be some sort of impact on top speed because the engine has more weight to carry, more work to do. In your example with the cars, would you agree that the one packed with people will take longer to get to top speed?
Perhaps it's the acceleration factor that is making me think the top speed would be different.
Hmmm...you learn something every day!
Acceleration = force / mass ...so the greater mass will lower acceleration, but it has no impact on top speed.
edit: Well, ignoring friction, but I think the difference is negligible when comparing single rider vs. 2nd up.
Last edited:
I hope your joking
|
|
|
|
|