Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 06:35 pm, by: Hesham Hammoudah(Iverson)
haha the amount of times me and my mates used to bag chuck norris back in year 12... there would be a house with a door and a window next to each other and he would always take the window...and i remember one episode where him and this girl stole this plane and he starts it and takes off all fine and everything and flies it and she goes "i didn't know you could fly a plane" and he replies "i cant"
Don Bagnall Moderator New Zealand I have LESS Soarers than Hayden :-(
Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 06:39 pm, by: Don Bagnall(Baggs)
Chuck Norris sees you when you're sleeping and he knows when you're awake. He knows when you've been bad or good, so be good or be prepared to have your face demolished by a roundhouse kick.
Don Bagnall Moderator New Zealand I have LESS Soarers than Hayden :-(
Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 06:43 pm, by: Don Bagnall(Baggs)
Legend has it that an epic battle took place between Chuck Norris' mullet and beard for the title of signature hair of Chuck Norris. Cast into obscurity, the defeated mullet was doomed to become Clay Aiken.
Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 07:34 pm, by: Jason Kingsmill(Jason_k)
Don Bagnall wrote on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 06:39 pm:
Chuck Norris sees you when you're sleeping and he knows when you're awake. He knows when you've been bad or good, so be good or be prepared to have your face demolished by a roundhouse kick.
Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 08:37 pm, by: David Vaughan(Davidv)
I've been on the side of the bikes in this thread but when you say a bike "handles better" then what exactly do you mean? In general a car will generate higher cornering force than a bike -- it has more rubber on the road and keeps it flatter. Even in the Soarer I can thrash most bikes through corner apices and in the IS300 I have to be careful not to run them over. Besides, getting alongside would just lead to self-embarrassment when they twist the throttle on exit .
One can be fooled by the fact that a bike can take a straighter line through most corners and thus appears fast but a longer curve or a tight turn shows up the reality that they can not generate the same 'g' forces when laid over rather than in straight acceleration.
Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 10:04 pm, by: Damian Ware(Frozenpod)
Well I drive cars on there limit all the time, my mate which has a CBR250 is about the same power wise maybe a little slower in a straight line.
But when we get out into the windy roads it is all over, it just really depends on the rider. When he goes around corners with his knee scraping on the ground it is at speeds where I cant keep up at all.
The only place a bike is slower is in a S bend where they have to completely changes their weight from one side to the other with no time to straighten up and accelerate in between.
Friday, May 12, 2006 - 07:34 am, by: Luke Nieuwhof(Luke_nieuwhof)
David, the bike will brake a lot better and come out of the corner a lot quicker than you ever will though.
With the right (read brave enough) rider, a bike will always be quicker. Power to weight is all its about at the end of the day and when some production bikes are pushing out the same rear wheel horsepower as the V8 Soarers here - game over.
Friday, May 12, 2006 - 08:54 am, by: David Vaughan(Davidv)
I know Luke . I think I have said those things repeatedly, from my first to my very last comment (see the line after which I used the embarrassed smiley).
Friday, May 12, 2006 - 09:37 am, by: Mike Triggs(Mikeandimah)
Damian Ware wrote on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 08:24 pm:
I come from the country and bikes are great for up the bush or riding in paddocks but for street use the are impractical and dangerous.
Only idiot semi-blind car drivers make bikes dangerous (plus a few silly riders who don't take conditions into account). I rode continuously for 20 years, had a bike licence for 7 years before I bothered to get a car one.
Part of the issue with normal road conditions, at least in Australia, which limits how quickly a bike can get around compared to cars, is road uncertainty. You can push really hard through a bend on a bike only to find a gravel patch or worse, some diesel fuel. So the margin for error is slimmer. As David said, a car has more rubber on the road and while I believe a bike will thrash most cars through the twisties, the bike rider always has to be alert for hazards which wouldn't worry a car as much- besides gravel and oil there are small (even dead) animals, birds, branches, potholes, water patches in the shade, all sorts of things can be scarey when you're riding 10/10ths.
Friday, May 12, 2006 - 11:07 am, by: Luke Nieuwhof(Luke_nieuwhof)
David, I see now.
Jason, what types of bike have you been riding? I'm sorry but there is no way a car (even a light one) will pull up in the same time as a bike. I'm gonig on theory here so if you have figures or something I'll be happily proved wrong but 200kg vs 1.5 tonne for most cars - game over yet again.
Friday, May 12, 2006 - 12:19 pm, by: Mike Triggs(Mikeandimah)
Given decent surface a bike will outbrake a car easily. In fact most bikes are overbraked, with two whopping discs up the front and another at the back. The limiting factor is often tyre adhesion, not braking power! On top of this most bikes have good engine braking (this was not the case in the "really old days" when some superbikes were two-strokes).
Friday, May 12, 2006 - 12:35 pm, by: Jason Kingsmill(Jason_k)
Mate, do you know how large the tyre contact patch is for a bikes front tyre?
You're lucky if you can get a 25mm cross section.
Think about a car...you can get pretty much the whole width of the tyre. lets say 235mm X 2, that's 470mm total.
My old bike(CBR600), 170kg's dry. Plus 75kg worth of me, plus about 25kg worth of fluids. That's 270Kg's. A Soarer TT...1500kg's plus ~100kg's of fluids and 75kg driver, that's 1675kg's.
275kg divided by 25mm = 11 units of load 1675kg divided by 470mm = 3.56 units of load
Let's go further and say that half the front tyre is making contact with the ground(average 110mm wide front tyre). That's 55mm. Do the sum, that's 5 units of load.
It's is much more complex than that, but that is putting it simply. There is also the fact that the amount of load on the front tyre isn't even at the entire contact area, as it is a "round" surface, unlike a relatively flat car tyre, disregarding some small camber effects.
Then take into account that the rear tyre on a bike is only about 5% of effective braking under maximum force, where it is much more in a car.
The only thing that bikes have in advantage is(in general terms) more braking power per weight unit. If you are in a car with a satisfactorily sized braking system(ie, can lock the wheels/activate ABS at high speed), then you will have it all over a bike.
Friday, May 12, 2006 - 12:43 pm, by: Jason Kingsmill(Jason_k)
Engine braking on bikes is only really used while not under race(speeding) conditions. As I mentioned above, rear braking power is only about 5% of maximum braking potential. The rear brakes on any decent bike is quite capable of fulfilling their duties without the need for engine braking. (We're talking road bikes and road going cars, not superbikes modified for the track)
Friday, May 12, 2006 - 01:04 pm, by: David Vaughan(Davidv)
In a hard stop, engine braking does absolutely nothing that the brakes will not, adding a gigantic zero to the rear braking force available at the road when you stomp your foot on the panic pedal. This was true even of a 1950s FJ Holden with drum brakes let alone a Soarer or modern bike with discs and ABS. Back in the '50s though, engine braking (rather than foot braking) was popular because it delayed brake fade on hills and helped you crash more slowly when your brakes failed. It is also a convenient way of controlling speed on downhill stretches, or when you expect to need to change down anyway.
I do not use engine braking much, except occasionally downhill, ever since brake fade ceased to be a substantial issue. If I need to change down sharply on a hill, I do it under braking to avoid a snatched takeup destabilising the rear end.
Friday, May 12, 2006 - 02:25 pm, by: Mike Triggs(Mikeandimah)
We'll have to let the braking thing go through to the keeper- I have ridden extensively (20 bikes spread over 20 years) and firmly believe most motorcyles with good brakes will outbrake most cars (note- I am not talking about ABS here) given reasonable adhesion (in other words, not in the wet).
As for engine braking, it wasn't mentioned as a huge contributing factor. However, it's very useful on a big twin or single bike from 30-40 years ago, with a single leading shoe front brake. Believe me, engine braking with those old Pommy engines was massive.