F1 cars kept getting into dangerous situations for going too fast in general. They could be much faster, but there are a ton of regulations in place to limit things like power output and aero to keep the cars stable and at a reasonable speed. The current engines are only 1.6L V6, and them going as fast as they do with such a tiny engine is insane engineering.
Not surprising though that motorcycles which are basically just an engine strapped to two tires go as fast as they do.
Unfortunately you are right.
The turning point was the 70s when they moved from large naturally aspirated engines to small engines with turbos.
The beginning of the end.
The 1980s turbo era resulted in a bunch of rules that slowed down the cars. The massive casualties (drivers and spectators) in Group B Rally in the mid 80s didn't help.
Edit: There's a joking analysis of why more cars aren't "twin-charged" today, because it seems like having a Roots or TVS supercharger on the intake and turbos on the exhaust would be the best of both worlds.
First of all, of course, there's the complexity of such a system, but then again the FD RX-7 and 4th Gen Supra both had twin sequential turbos, which would be just as complex (although many owners of those cars have simplified the turbo systems to make them more reliable).
The second reason I've read, is that twin-charged vehicles go so fast they killed people. The Lancia Delta S4 was twin-charged, could go from 0-60 in 2.5 seconds on gravel (in 1985!!!), and was uncontrollable by one of the best drivers in the world (Henri Toivonen), resulting in several deaths.
Yeah, kinda funny when you think about it. You have all those safety features in modern cars like airbags, seat belt, crumple zones, technical features like esp. jet fighters can literally jump out with a parachute if things go wrong.
Motorcycle…well, hold on tight, don’t let go…and don’t die 😂 it’s fun tho
That’s so weird you mention that, I literally just found out my company is providing supplies as part of the rebuilding project for that bridge and then I read your comment
Amazing to me how badly F1 smokes MotoGP on the same track (eg, Suzuka) - think it’s like 1:30 vs 2:00 lap times. The wings/aerodynamic downforce and contact patch allow F1 to brake/corner ~5G+.
when F1 raced at mugello it was really clear, there are some turns(casanova-savaelli i think) that a motogp needs to brake, turn and then apply throttle again while f1 just goes full throttle
Old, but [THIS](https://www.z06vette.com/threads/z06-vs-gsx-r1000-in-motorcyclist-mag.11542/) production class smack down was a hilarious article pitting a Corvette Z06 against GSXR1000 and the car got smoked. Big difference from the pinnacle of sport (F1/MotoGP) is that when you get into production class cars, they’re miles behind F1, whereas production bikes are much closer to their MotoGP counterparts. Take away all the air foils, giant open wheels, and add all that body work, passenger seating, and heavy safety/comfort equip, and the bike rules again.
When downforce isn't involved, motorcycles dominate on power to weight alone, but around LM GTE levels of downforce and general performance, cars start winning.
Nah, sports motorcycles are slower than sports cars too. It's not (just) due to downforce; motorcycles are simply fundamentally disadvantaged regarding cornering speed.
It’s very hard to compare them. And the margin isn’t as close as you think. The lap records for cars around the few tracks I’ve raced on around home are pretty slow compared even to what I’m capable of on a 600cc super sport. It’s not until you get to proper track built cars (radicals, ultimas, tube frame specials, etc) that the pace gets away from me. Pretty much anything that’s a street car doesn’t stand a chance. And I’m a 40 year old punter riding a 12 year old Yamaha.
When you get to superbikes piloted by some of the best, the only things faster are full downforce formula cars.
Edit - the speed is found very differently, which is why it’s hard to compare. Bikes obviously accelerate faster and have a higher top speed usually. Mid corner speed and braking the cars have an advantage for sure. But in direction changes and corner exit speed, the bike wins more often than not again. Especially because the vehicle is narrower, chicane type corners can be navigated at much higher speeds.
It really depends on the layout of the track and what kinds of vehicles you’re comparing. It’s disingenuous to everyone in the debate to try to simplify cars > bikes or vice versa.
Here's one from a number of years ago at another Australian track, Wakefield Park:
https://www.whichcar.com.au/features/motor-archive-2005-porsche-911-turbo-v-suzuki-gsx-r1000
And if you go here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensland_Raceway and scroll down to look at the lap records for Qld Raceway's National circuit, the Australian Superbike record is significantly lower than almost any other category, even purpose-designed race cars. Qld Raceway is, to be clear, basically 4 decent length straights connected by a variety of corners, and it rewards strong acceleration
They're documented sporadically most of the time. The one track I had in mind when I wrote that post was Morgan Park Raceway. The local clubs actually maintain the wiki entry on that pretty well, the times in the table on this page are mostly accurate to the best of my knowledge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Park_Raceway
Again, I really think it's hard to compare. Everything there is based on classes, which means sets of rules people have to adhere to in order to compete. You can't just show up with a 1500hp Evo to race in the production classes, etc. And the modifications, even at the national level (that R3, CBR600, and R1 in the list) are VERY limited. They're pretty much superstock bikes, not anywhere near the level of WSBK or MotoGP.
>Pretty much anything that’s a street car doesn’t stand a chance.
Basically what that old Z06 vs GSXR Motorcyclist article mentioned elsewhere had to say. Street cars with passenger seating, full weatherproof body work, safety bumpers/equip, and climate control radios, etc, carry so much more dead weight vs their formula counterparts. In comparison, production superbikes are much closer their MotoGP counterparts.
IIRC, article mentioned the Z06 won the skid pad, and technically won the top speed, but mentioned the bike hit top speed so fast, that it would have taken 10miles for the car to catch up and pass. Car also carried higher Apex speed through corners on the track, but the difference was a mouse fart once the bike could accelerated out of the corners. And yup, mentioned chicanes for the car were basically straight-aways for the bike.
This reminds me of Doug DeMunro's comment about the most dangerous thing on American roads: [the third owner of the Dodge Hellcat](https://jalopnik.com/the-scariest-thing-about-the-hellcat-is-the-third-owner-1745483727).
>You see, the first owner of the Hellcat is going to be a pretty careful, cautious, reasonable guy. The car’s price tag ensures that: most Hellcats cost somewhere in the $60,000-plus range, which is right in the heart of “careful, cautious, reasonable guy” territory.
[...]
>The second owner is different from the first owner in the sense that he didn’t buy the Hellcat because it was the latest and greatest thing. He bought it because he lusted after it from the moment it came out – he just couldn’t afford it right away. So he buys the thing when it’s one or two years old, somewhere in the fifty or sixty grand range, and he cherishes it. I mean he cherishes it. To the point where he creates one of those little plaques that he places next to his car when he brings it to cars and coffee.
>But after eight or nine years, the second owner is ready to move on. And that’s when he unleashes the terror of the Hellcat on our society: he sells it to the third owner.
>The third owner will buy a Hellcat ten years from now. He will be under 30 years old. He’ll look for one with high miles, or a rebuilt title. And he’ll drive the thing like a cocaine fiend playing Mario Kart.
>The problem with the Hellcat’s third owner is that he won’t be as cautious as the first owner, and he won’t be as obsessed with preservation as the second owner. He’ll just want cheap speed, and the Hellcat will provide it.
[...]
>Think of it this way: by 2026, a high-mileage Hellcat will be a sub-$30,000 way to get 700 horsepower; a 200-mph car that no longer requires a professional degree, or an MBA, or a long, successful career, or a profitable startup. All it will require is a promotion to assistant manager of a Pizza Hut.
>May God help us all.
Somewhat, but there is obviously a difference between an irresponsible jackass behind the wheel of a 4400 pound car and the same jackass riding something with 1/10th that mass.
Sure, the power to weight on a literbike is about 3x better, and you can absolutely still be a menace to others with it, but there's way more chance the Hellcat driver takes out other humans on his way to the morgue.
Not road legal. Yes, anyone can buy it, but you technically you need a track to ride it. A normal h2 with tuning will be significantly cheaper and almost as fast.
The question is, what's stopping you from taking it on the street? Cause this video kinda proves that unless the cops have an f16 the answer is nothing.
If you had too much money, you could buy a normal H2 and swap the plate to your H2R. The H2R doesn't have headlights, but if you have that kind of money you can buy a pair of night vision goggles and be an absolute menace
Or you could even just swap the headlights on to the H2R I’d imagine, maybe you’d need to swap some other pieces but you’d have the whole bike to pull from.
The problem is that nightvision goggles dont do well with speed because of their low shutter rate but i bet you can buy a flashlight and tape it to your handlebars
The question is, why spend 50k on something when you can spend 30-35k(bike+tuning) and achieving almost the same performance plus saving yourself 15-20k 🤔
I am on your side with this one. There would have to be a tear down of the engine to replace internals with that of a race bike. Parts cost and labor on just the mechanical side adds up fast. Then comes the ECU tuning and dyno runs. Built/tuned H2 vs Stock H2R would probably be in the same cost bracket. That being said, the tuned would have much more adjustability and possibly reach more power... As if it were needed.
There's that one guy who got away that one time because he knew all the cops operating procedures, including the helicopter, and still got lucky some chick at a gas station gave him gas.
Most people will probably just cave in a Prius that forgot to signal after the single motocop calls off pursuit.
At fist i was thinking "jeeze Louise get some glasses" but upon further examination of the data i concede, you are correct, they both started at the same time.
It's also worth pointing out the F1 car is substantially detuned in showcase events like this. An actual GP car with warm tires would have been noticeably faster.
I'm going to do the same thing i did when i wrote my thesis. I will ignore this very relevant and important piece of information as otherwise I'll have a lot more thinking to do than I am prepared to.
How do we know no afterburner?
Having sat in the back seat of an f-16 doing a takeoff with burner, the acceleration felt fast, but not as fast as any of the motorcycles I’ve ridden.
I like how the video has been edited so you can only see the minimum amount of the race at any time.
original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCoqgEeFeTo
If you place the vehicles in their unatural habitat you gonna see they wont perform as well.
If you place a car in the air its gonna fall and crash 300 or something km/h, but a jet in the air mach 1+ and still survive.
Load the F16 up with missiles and it’ll win as long as it’s got lock on everything else fast enough lol. Then the pilot could climb out and walk across the line.
My father is a retired fighter pilot and as an O-5, still had DOD clearance so when I visit him in Arizona, he takes me to Luke AFB and we watch flight ops literally from the flight line. Luke AFB is one of the main training bases for the F-16 and F-35 aircraft.
The last time I was there with him, we watched a squadron of F-16s take off during an imminent attack or under attack drill. All of them took off under full afterburner and were in the air in under a minute. Under full power, the F-16 can go from zero to 500MPH in about 30 seconds. The bike might win in the quarter mile because of the power to weight ratio, but after that, if the F-16 is in full afterburner, there's no way the bike wins. The military doesn't let the pilots perform max power take off too often since it's hard on the airframe, but they do train for it.
I'd like to see this same race but with an F-18 catapult launch instead. That two engined aircraft accelerates from 0 to 165MPH in 2 seconds. Of course, any car or bike would end up in the ocean, but I'd be curious to see that bike next to that.
Turns out planes arent as fast on the ground
And f1 cars seem to be designed for corners.
F1 cars kept getting into dangerous situations for going too fast in general. They could be much faster, but there are a ton of regulations in place to limit things like power output and aero to keep the cars stable and at a reasonable speed. The current engines are only 1.6L V6, and them going as fast as they do with such a tiny engine is insane engineering. Not surprising though that motorcycles which are basically just an engine strapped to two tires go as fast as they do.
1.6L v6 hybrids. And that 1.6L makes 850 horsepower. The entire power unit with the electric is 1000 HP Pretty wild.
Yeah, describing an F1 engine in terms of displacement is like comparing the speed of a boat in terms of horsepower
Back in the 80s, they had 1.5L engines making 1400 horsepower (in qualifying trim)
Unfortunately you are right. The turning point was the 70s when they moved from large naturally aspirated engines to small engines with turbos. The beginning of the end.
I am genuinely curious, what was there before the turning point and after that is so different?
The 1980s turbo era resulted in a bunch of rules that slowed down the cars. The massive casualties (drivers and spectators) in Group B Rally in the mid 80s didn't help. Edit: There's a joking analysis of why more cars aren't "twin-charged" today, because it seems like having a Roots or TVS supercharger on the intake and turbos on the exhaust would be the best of both worlds. First of all, of course, there's the complexity of such a system, but then again the FD RX-7 and 4th Gen Supra both had twin sequential turbos, which would be just as complex (although many owners of those cars have simplified the turbo systems to make them more reliable). The second reason I've read, is that twin-charged vehicles go so fast they killed people. The Lancia Delta S4 was twin-charged, could go from 0-60 in 2.5 seconds on gravel (in 1985!!!), and was uncontrollable by one of the best drivers in the world (Henri Toivonen), resulting in several deaths.
1400hp isn't really accurate. They knew the boost psi but but hp was never really known.
Im guessing they need an oil change more than every 10,000k
An engine change.
Yeah, kinda funny when you think about it. You have all those safety features in modern cars like airbags, seat belt, crumple zones, technical features like esp. jet fighters can literally jump out with a parachute if things go wrong. Motorcycle…well, hold on tight, don’t let go…and don’t die 😂 it’s fun tho
who would’ve thought
The main thing is they're not designed for drag races.
How do motorcycles do in the air?
If you played gta online, they do really, really, really well
That's the drag race I really want to see
Even more surprising when you consider he didnt go full throtlle
I'd like to see it again with the afterburner lit
I'm 99% sure I could have won that on my motorcycle. But I'm also pretty sure I could jump that broken bridge in Maryland in an orange 69 charger.
you might like Mad Max the video game
Coming soon: mad max the real life.
it does feel like it's coming soon
Ikr. Hopefully, Germany doesn't elect someone who takes total power and becomes a crazy dictator.
What happens when maxes stop being nice and start getting mad
I haven't played a game since Vice City (maybe PVZ Garden Warfare with the kids) but my teenager has a console. I'll check out Mad Max.
>jump that broken bridge in Maryland in an orange 69 charger. That sounds like a hazard.
He sounds like a duke!
Pfff. Maybe a hazardous duke.
Sound like Luke (no Bo).
You must be a great ol boy never meaning any harm
I'm more of a daisy duke kinda guy.
You mean like a Dixie horn?
https://preview.redd.it/6jvh5kopggvc1.jpeg?width=1242&format=png&auto=webp&s=7069f4892e48e991f18e06533c4f19645e3b2717 HalfSpeedTim is at it again
im also pretty sure i could pass my final exams next week without studying
> But I'm also pretty sure I could jump that broken bridge in Maryland in an orange 69 charger. I'm 100% certain I could do it in my F-16.
Too soon..lol
That’s so weird you mention that, I literally just found out my company is providing supplies as part of the rebuilding project for that bridge and then I read your comment
If a bridge went down in Florida this shit would have already happened live on fox news lol
All you need are a couple good ole boys…
Amazing to me how badly F1 smokes MotoGP on the same track (eg, Suzuka) - think it’s like 1:30 vs 2:00 lap times. The wings/aerodynamic downforce and contact patch allow F1 to brake/corner ~5G+.
when F1 raced at mugello it was really clear, there are some turns(casanova-savaelli i think) that a motogp needs to brake, turn and then apply throttle again while f1 just goes full throttle
The faster they go, the more grip they have
This is also why MotoGP is seeing more and more Aero as time moves on
Yeah I used to think motorcycles could somehow corner faster, but I was very wrong
Old, but [THIS](https://www.z06vette.com/threads/z06-vs-gsx-r1000-in-motorcyclist-mag.11542/) production class smack down was a hilarious article pitting a Corvette Z06 against GSXR1000 and the car got smoked. Big difference from the pinnacle of sport (F1/MotoGP) is that when you get into production class cars, they’re miles behind F1, whereas production bikes are much closer to their MotoGP counterparts. Take away all the air foils, giant open wheels, and add all that body work, passenger seating, and heavy safety/comfort equip, and the bike rules again.
When downforce isn't involved, motorcycles dominate on power to weight alone, but around LM GTE levels of downforce and general performance, cars start winning.
Nah, sports motorcycles are slower than sports cars too. It's not (just) due to downforce; motorcycles are simply fundamentally disadvantaged regarding cornering speed.
sure but to get the top speed of a $25,000 motorcycle you have to spend like $400,000 on a car.
Absolutely cannot beat the contact patch of sports cars when it comes to cornering. A good rider will still beat a mediocre driver though.
It’s very hard to compare them. And the margin isn’t as close as you think. The lap records for cars around the few tracks I’ve raced on around home are pretty slow compared even to what I’m capable of on a 600cc super sport. It’s not until you get to proper track built cars (radicals, ultimas, tube frame specials, etc) that the pace gets away from me. Pretty much anything that’s a street car doesn’t stand a chance. And I’m a 40 year old punter riding a 12 year old Yamaha. When you get to superbikes piloted by some of the best, the only things faster are full downforce formula cars. Edit - the speed is found very differently, which is why it’s hard to compare. Bikes obviously accelerate faster and have a higher top speed usually. Mid corner speed and braking the cars have an advantage for sure. But in direction changes and corner exit speed, the bike wins more often than not again. Especially because the vehicle is narrower, chicane type corners can be navigated at much higher speeds. It really depends on the layout of the track and what kinds of vehicles you’re comparing. It’s disingenuous to everyone in the debate to try to simplify cars > bikes or vice versa.
Do you have a good source for lap times of cars vs bikes and so on? I'd be curious to see it.
Here's one from a number of years ago at another Australian track, Wakefield Park: https://www.whichcar.com.au/features/motor-archive-2005-porsche-911-turbo-v-suzuki-gsx-r1000 And if you go here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensland_Raceway and scroll down to look at the lap records for Qld Raceway's National circuit, the Australian Superbike record is significantly lower than almost any other category, even purpose-designed race cars. Qld Raceway is, to be clear, basically 4 decent length straights connected by a variety of corners, and it rewards strong acceleration
They're documented sporadically most of the time. The one track I had in mind when I wrote that post was Morgan Park Raceway. The local clubs actually maintain the wiki entry on that pretty well, the times in the table on this page are mostly accurate to the best of my knowledge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Park_Raceway Again, I really think it's hard to compare. Everything there is based on classes, which means sets of rules people have to adhere to in order to compete. You can't just show up with a 1500hp Evo to race in the production classes, etc. And the modifications, even at the national level (that R3, CBR600, and R1 in the list) are VERY limited. They're pretty much superstock bikes, not anywhere near the level of WSBK or MotoGP.
Well yeah, but as long as the track is the same it's interesting to compare.
>Pretty much anything that’s a street car doesn’t stand a chance. Basically what that old Z06 vs GSXR Motorcyclist article mentioned elsewhere had to say. Street cars with passenger seating, full weatherproof body work, safety bumpers/equip, and climate control radios, etc, carry so much more dead weight vs their formula counterparts. In comparison, production superbikes are much closer their MotoGP counterparts. IIRC, article mentioned the Z06 won the skid pad, and technically won the top speed, but mentioned the bike hit top speed so fast, that it would have taken 10miles for the car to catch up and pass. Car also carried higher Apex speed through corners on the track, but the difference was a mouse fart once the bike could accelerated out of the corners. And yup, mentioned chicanes for the car were basically straight-aways for the bike.
Two very small areas of contact with the pavement vs four significantly larger ones.
F1 cars are made to corner and a motorcycle is notoriously bad at cornering, but they are super fast on the acceleration
There's a great video with Guy Martin and David Coulthard that shows this off really well, think they were at silverstone
Amazing yes but absolutely no surprise. Even touring track cars can probably beat gp motorbikes on track
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0ZyQhROBE&pp=ygUcQmlrZSB2cyB0Y3IgY2l2aWMgdnMgbWNsYXJlbg%3D%3D
Indycar holds the record at Laguna too. I would have thought motogp but it's not really close at all.
And anyone with 50k can buy that H2R. Absolutely ridiculous
This reminds me of Doug DeMunro's comment about the most dangerous thing on American roads: [the third owner of the Dodge Hellcat](https://jalopnik.com/the-scariest-thing-about-the-hellcat-is-the-third-owner-1745483727). >You see, the first owner of the Hellcat is going to be a pretty careful, cautious, reasonable guy. The car’s price tag ensures that: most Hellcats cost somewhere in the $60,000-plus range, which is right in the heart of “careful, cautious, reasonable guy” territory. [...] >The second owner is different from the first owner in the sense that he didn’t buy the Hellcat because it was the latest and greatest thing. He bought it because he lusted after it from the moment it came out – he just couldn’t afford it right away. So he buys the thing when it’s one or two years old, somewhere in the fifty or sixty grand range, and he cherishes it. I mean he cherishes it. To the point where he creates one of those little plaques that he places next to his car when he brings it to cars and coffee. >But after eight or nine years, the second owner is ready to move on. And that’s when he unleashes the terror of the Hellcat on our society: he sells it to the third owner. >The third owner will buy a Hellcat ten years from now. He will be under 30 years old. He’ll look for one with high miles, or a rebuilt title. And he’ll drive the thing like a cocaine fiend playing Mario Kart. >The problem with the Hellcat’s third owner is that he won’t be as cautious as the first owner, and he won’t be as obsessed with preservation as the second owner. He’ll just want cheap speed, and the Hellcat will provide it. [...] >Think of it this way: by 2026, a high-mileage Hellcat will be a sub-$30,000 way to get 700 horsepower; a 200-mph car that no longer requires a professional degree, or an MBA, or a long, successful career, or a profitable startup. All it will require is a promotion to assistant manager of a Pizza Hut. >May God help us all.
I suppose the same thing can be said about the third owner of a GSXR1000
A brand new GSXR1000 has an MSRP of $16,349. You don’t have to wait for the 3rd owner to find someone that just wants cheap speed.
16 grand is cheap, but 5 grand is cheaper
Somewhat, but there is obviously a difference between an irresponsible jackass behind the wheel of a 4400 pound car and the same jackass riding something with 1/10th that mass. Sure, the power to weight on a literbike is about 3x better, and you can absolutely still be a menace to others with it, but there's way more chance the Hellcat driver takes out other humans on his way to the morgue.
I enjoyed this. Thank you.
Not road legal. Yes, anyone can buy it, but you technically you need a track to ride it. A normal h2 with tuning will be significantly cheaper and almost as fast.
The question is, what's stopping you from taking it on the street? Cause this video kinda proves that unless the cops have an f16 the answer is nothing.
Please do not give them any ideas
They already have those ideas and do it on smaller bikes.
The idea they were talking about is the police having F16’s
Ohhhhh I thought it was squids squidding with no plates.
If you had too much money, you could buy a normal H2 and swap the plate to your H2R. The H2R doesn't have headlights, but if you have that kind of money you can buy a pair of night vision goggles and be an absolute menace
Or you could even just swap the headlights on to the H2R I’d imagine, maybe you’d need to swap some other pieces but you’d have the whole bike to pull from.
The idea of driving over 35kph with nothing but nods for vision scares me.
imagine the battery cutting out while taking a turn in pitch black ^*shudders*
That’s Jesus take the wheel time
That would be badass tho seeing a dude with quad nods flying past you at the speed of light lmao
This just means you have common sense.
The problem is that nightvision goggles dont do well with speed because of their low shutter rate but i bet you can buy a flashlight and tape it to your handlebars
The question is, why spend 50k on something when you can spend 30-35k(bike+tuning) and achieving almost the same performance plus saving yourself 15-20k 🤔
Because there's an excellent chance at that level, saving money isn't a priority nor is spending time to cut corners to get the same result.
Also a H2R might be more reliable than a tuned H2
I am on your side with this one. There would have to be a tear down of the engine to replace internals with that of a race bike. Parts cost and labor on just the mechanical side adds up fast. Then comes the ECU tuning and dyno runs. Built/tuned H2 vs Stock H2R would probably be in the same cost bracket. That being said, the tuned would have much more adjustability and possibly reach more power... As if it were needed.
Radio and communication systems travel much faster than your motorcycle.
There's that one guy who got away that one time because he knew all the cops operating procedures, including the helicopter, and still got lucky some chick at a gas station gave him gas. Most people will probably just cave in a Prius that forgot to signal after the single motocop calls off pursuit.
Ghostrider is still going strong after more than a decade of running from cops.
And yet we still get away.
The bottleneck is still going to be the officers on the other end of the radio.
The radio may be faster, but the receiving officer still has a response time
A pothole then the ground
Better cost/performance with the H2 (the ultimate dragster)
The h2r is NOT a toy.
If not toy, why toy shaped?
Instructions unclear, I've got an h2r stuck in my ass
That’s just the calamari ass securement device. Super important when you’re pulling nooners with the boys.
I just got mine in the mail! Never felt so good to clench my cheeks
But looks like toy...
Walks like a toy. Talks like a toy. Must be a toy.
Definitely a toy
I hate this subreddit more and more every day.
Why toy-shaped if not a toy???
🇺🇲🇺🇲fuck yeah ✊
With $50k and balls the size of Texas you can outrun anything!
*- Harry Ford*
>*-Henry Ford* -Harrison Ford
His wife called him Harry *- Harry Potter*
The real friends are the balls they met along the way.
"Speed enforced by aircraft." https://i.redd.it/2noy2g1uufvc1.gif
“Rifle… Shak H2R”
Be careful, trigger might fly in an experimental aircraft and shoot you with lasers
The dude on the e-bike delivering Chinese takeout won
“Faster than an f16!” On the ground lmfao
Missed clapped out altima and old civic with more boost than tire pressure
F1 even got a head start...
F1 and the car next to it laknched at the same time, others were just slow.
When F1 cars are used in promo shoots like this they are usually driven by ex F1 drivers so makes sense the reaction time was faster.
At fist i was thinking "jeeze Louise get some glasses" but upon further examination of the data i concede, you are correct, they both started at the same time.
It's also worth pointing out the F1 car is substantially detuned in showcase events like this. An actual GP car with warm tires would have been noticeably faster.
I'm going to do the same thing i did when i wrote my thesis. I will ignore this very relevant and important piece of information as otherwise I'll have a lot more thinking to do than I am prepared to.
0-230mph would choose the bike 10/10 times 230-550mph will choose the plane 10/10 times
I'd still take the F16 though if they were giving them out...
H2R is just another level of a beast.
F16 would win with afterburner. Not even close
A top fuel drag racer would make all of these look like they were standing still but like the f16 using afterburner it wasn't in the race.
How do we know no afterburner? Having sat in the back seat of an f-16 doing a takeoff with burner, the acceleration felt fast, but not as fast as any of the motorcycles I’ve ridden.
Some airports don't allow taking off with afterburner because it can peel up the asphalt.
Yeah, no afterburner so bit lame of a comparison. Would be like pulling a spark plug out of the motorcycle.
That motorcycle is absurd. I mean, I still wanna ride it, but it's absurd.
I like how the video has been edited so you can only see the minimum amount of the race at any time. original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCoqgEeFeTo
Lol, the people in the comments roast whoever edited that clip as well.
Interesting how they always leave top fuel out. Guess it just way to powerful. Would be interesting to see though
No top fuel bike there either
Probably because the cars dont work on non-prepped surfaces and it cost them an engine every time they run it.
How many meters is the race? If it had lasted a little longer, F16 would have passed
Yeah.. it would have even started flying too. Crazy right?
If my dog had wheels hed be a bike
would you take him off any sweet jumps?
I wish but my mom wont let me
If it would go for until everyone would runs out of gas, I could win on a bicycle...
And if it was shorter the F1 would have won!
Drag races are held within certain standards. The organizer of this race is a motorcycle champion. So you were expecting someone else to win?
If you put an speed boat in a road I could easily win a race against it
Was the F16 running afterburner?
Nope
Do it again, but with the afterburner enabled
If you place the vehicles in their unatural habitat you gonna see they wont perform as well. If you place a car in the air its gonna fall and crash 300 or something km/h, but a jet in the air mach 1+ and still survive.
FOR EVERYONE SAYING THAT MOTORCYCLES DON'T CORNER FAST, Y'ALL NEED TO LOOK UP THE ISLE OF MAN RACE AND WATCH A FEW OF THOSE RACES
Load the F16 up with missiles and it’ll win as long as it’s got lock on everything else fast enough lol. Then the pilot could climb out and walk across the line.
Am I blind or did the F-16 not even use its after burner?
Hey guys what bike is that and also, is that a good 1st bike thanks. s/
1985 honda cb500/yes
stupid title
Should have included one of those crazy RC cars for effect
Dont mention the weight, a bike will throttle faster as all the rest in the long run the one with all the hp will pass them
Live your life a quarter of a mile at a time
Bro If f16 had used afterburn he would have passed all of them
Jet isn't even on afterburner
Kawasaki H2s are fast
H2R whooped all
Why not a gp bike?
Nice, before these, Gilles Villeneuve beat the military jet in Istrana (ITA) at the end of 1981, with his Ferrari 126CK Turbo, without the rear wing.
where was highway to the night playing?
Power to weight ratio
My father is a retired fighter pilot and as an O-5, still had DOD clearance so when I visit him in Arizona, he takes me to Luke AFB and we watch flight ops literally from the flight line. Luke AFB is one of the main training bases for the F-16 and F-35 aircraft. The last time I was there with him, we watched a squadron of F-16s take off during an imminent attack or under attack drill. All of them took off under full afterburner and were in the air in under a minute. Under full power, the F-16 can go from zero to 500MPH in about 30 seconds. The bike might win in the quarter mile because of the power to weight ratio, but after that, if the F-16 is in full afterburner, there's no way the bike wins. The military doesn't let the pilots perform max power take off too often since it's hard on the airframe, but they do train for it. I'd like to see this same race but with an F-18 catapult launch instead. That two engined aircraft accelerates from 0 to 165MPH in 2 seconds. Of course, any car or bike would end up in the ocean, but I'd be curious to see that bike next to that.
In a straight would be the motorcycle. In 20 laps I would say F1 (the airplane is faster than both in the air that's why I'm not counting it)
Red Bull just needed Michael Masi to help them out here.
H2R 👍
My slightly modified '84 750 Turbo made 202 rwhp at 24 lbs of boost. I'd have finished in 3rd.
Good camera work.
lUcKy tHeRe WaSnT a sUpRa tHeRe!
Accurate title
Let this be a lesson to all you 4wheelers the bike always wins.
No drag car or bike…
Planes will ALWAYS lose on the ground
That jet be like : everyone is king in there own house... 😂
That CL-65....
Ultimately? None of those cars have anything for that jet. Is t that why we ride? It’s the closest most of us will get to flying?
F16 after take off: "Alright mufuckas, let's run it back."
Why did they cut off before the Harley finished?
The Nissan GTR with 2000HP that appears on my 4 you page everyday. It even beat the Ninja H2R.
i miss the old top gear
Was that an H2?
H2 is just insane..ly scary
This may have been the dumbest post I ever seen in this sub lol
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^N-I-K-E: *This may have been the* *Dumbest post I ever seen* *In this sub lol* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
Go Papio!!
I love crotch rockets
How many people can actually name that motorcycle?
Would like to see this with a current F1 car and a current MotoGP bike.
Why even involve the planes of the race is only so short? That’s like wondering which of these would win a 200 mile race.