220MPH on a bike?

[RandomTask]

I'm going to have to argue you all here. Owning a 600cc CBR I know how fast 100mph feels. Also, I know this history of that bike in that video. You can't see it (but you can hear it), its a completely worked (and on 17psi) motor putting close to 500hp down to the rear wheels. Theres a video floating around somewhere where they dyno queened the thing up to 701hp. I think the speedo could be off perhaps 10mph at worse, but anytime you're putting close to 1hp per 1lb, things get fast. (Imaging stuffing 2700hp into a honda civic)

[CBFryman]

that isnt the point, the point is he doesnt have the TRACTION to burry the needle, that quick at that.
when he does another video and holds a gps in his hand and the gps shows 220mph + or - 10mph i will beleive it...untill then i said the gearratio's where changed...

[CBFryman]

and you can stuff 2700 hp into a civic... and id put my truck on it it couldnt hit 220mph that quick, if at all. 220mph via wheel power (not rocket power) is no laughing matter. imagine the difference between 25 and 50mph on a bike, BIG difference... 100 to 200 mph would be even greater id imagine.

[Lamboholic]

You must be confused with an other video, I just saw the gostrider bikes again and these are real 500bhp bikes. And you can easely tell the difference in sound and speed. The video on this toppic never showed a bike anywhere near 220MPH. I guess 180MPH if not less. The guy must have changed gear ratios and you can tell this bike didn't had any where near 500 bhp, the speedo and the rev indictors showed no wheelspin at all. Very unlikely for a 500+bhp bike if you consider the wheely at the start. (he defenately opend the throttle) And a bike with a 1000bhp/ton ratio sounds impressive but including the driver it's going to be a bit less

[RandomTask]

Originally Posted by CBFryman

that isnt the point, the point is he doesnt have the TRACTION to burry the needle, that quick at that.
when he does another video and holds a gps in his hand and the gps shows 220mph + or - 10mph i will beleive it...untill then i said the gearratio's where changed...

Then please explain to me how top fuel dragsters can do 330mph+ in 1400 feet? He can get the traction, its possible. When you weigh that little, you don't need the same traction area as a car, especially since the bike is RWD. Again, reffering to experience, bikes can accelerate that fast.

Originally Posted by CBFryman

and you can stuff 2700 hp into a civic... and id put my truck on it it couldnt hit 220mph that quick, if at all. 220mph via wheel power (not rocket power) is no laughing matter. imagine the difference between 25 and 50mph on a bike, BIG difference... 100 to 200 mph would be even greater id imagine.

Again, I don't have to imagine, I know, I have the experience. What about the Mclaren F1? It has 627 HP and weighs in at 2840lbs. It has a top speed of 231 MPH. Thats 4 lbs per hp. If it were to put down 1hp to lb, it would a sub 6 second quarter mile car.

[Lotus49]

I have a busa, that is not 220, what he did was an aftermarket face gauge, Max in 6th gear.. about 190 is 10,500 rpm's. Also by his shift points it looks like he has a larger rear sporcket, which also would account for speed being off. That is about 160mph... 200 look ALOT faster than that, beleave me its not real. Also, a McLaren take a long time to reach 231. Ill post the video later, and you need alot of room. Even with a stock busa you need a mile or so to really reach top end.

Here is a photo of my gauges






on the right you can see the speedo, indication the SAME position as the one on the left, The one on the right reads 180 mph and the one on the left reads 220



Oh btw, where the rider shifts from 5-6th is the same point you would shift from 160

Here is a stock hayabusa sprocket, works with a stock hayabusa. Why? becasue the speedo is calibrated to the output shaft of the transmission.


The actual speed sensor is located on the cluch/sprocket cover housing located on the right



here is your aftermarket sprocket. causing a huge difference in rear wheel speed. the speed sensor would not pick up on that change becasue the chain and the output shaft are still moving at the same speed as before.. Its like changing the rear end in your car, or the tire size and expecting the same speed reading



people that think he is doing 220+ are the same people you see looking in car windows to see how fast the car can go by the speedo.

BTW where he shifts from 5th to 6th at "210" is the same point you would shift at. at 170, also his rpm gauge is wrong too, where it reads 11,200 rpm's is where 10,200 rpms are at. 10.2 is where your gov is limited to in 6th gear.

[Lotus49]

http://curl.planetmirror.com/pub/mis...usa-Aarhus.mpg


there is what 187 really looks like... (300 kph)

[2of9]

cant beleive he was doing a wheely at that speed

[spudshady]

Originally Posted by OCUJer

I just watched it again, and CBFryman is right. Watch the last 5 seconds of the video or so, when his speedo hits 100 look at the lines in the road. Now, I've never been 200mph, but I have been up to 100mph and those lines go by A LOT faster than that at 75 or 80 much less 100mph. This video is faked for sure.

ive always thought this was fake, at the start of the vid the manouvering of the bike looks very awkward, the rider in the reflection in the clocks nods his head twice, you dont actually make out his hands lettin off the throttle between changes (i know full throttle and clutchless changes are possible but you gonna try it on a busa with the frotn wheel in the air?

probably stemmed from some guy in a fast car goading a biker on a forum and he came up with the vid.

the speed it is travelling at is wrong compared to the speedo yeah, it doesnt look as if it gets more than 150, the speed it accelerates from 50-100, 100-150 and 150-200 is the same on the speedo, even i know that aint possible! ive driven at 190mph and scenery goes past you a hell of a lot quicker than that!! when you aint glued to the road not blinking

[Altimas]

Theres a big difference between a car with slick aerodynamics and a bike...

[spudshady]

Originally Posted by Altimas

Theres a big difference between a car with slick aerodynamics and a bike...

meaning?, i would say a bike is more aerodynamic than a car by a big margin, fairing pushing air upwards to try and clear riders head, side fairing has indents for legs to be pressed into and the low down position is a lot more slippery than a car?

what did you mean by it?

[CBFryman]

well i may as well defend my view point even if its adead thread...

Originally Posted by RandomTask

Then please explain to me how top fuel dragsters can do 330mph+ in 1400 feet? He can get the traction, its possible. When you weigh that little, you don't need the same traction area as a car, especially since the bike is RWD. Again, reffering to experience, bikes can accelerate that fast.



Again, I don't have to imagine, I know, I have the experience. What about the Mclaren F1? It has 627 HP and weighs in at 2840lbs. It has a top speed of 231 MPH. Thats 4 lbs per hp. If it were to put down 1hp to lb, it would a sub 6 second quarter mile car.

Traction patch of a McClarin F1 is far greater than the bikes AND had more weight over the traction patch resulting in even greater traction.

look at a dragsters tires and look at a motor cycles tires. the traction patch is at least 5 times greater from one wheel and is probably made from a much stickier compound and on a much stickeier road with more weight over its traction area.

once agian i will say that there is a thing called the "hand of god" where you can have the power to weight ratio but you just start getting wheel spin at high speed which had resulted in death in some casses due to lack of controll.

[Lafarga]

I recall reading somewhere that motorcycle manufactuers tweak the speedometer to say its going faster then it truely is. I believe it was around %10 - %15. That could account for some of the speed.

[zozza8]

thats 220 km...look at the gauge and mph is right inside there.

[Altimas]

Originally Posted by spudshady

meaning?, i would say a bike is more aerodynamic than a car by a big margin, fairing pushing air upwards to try and clear riders head, side fairing has indents for legs to be pressed into and the low down position is a lot more slippery than a car?

what did you mean by it?

You couldn't be more wrong.
If bikes were more aerodynamic an 11 second bike would have a huge top speed...

http://sportrider.com/tech/146_0106_aero/

The ZX-12R has a frontal area of 6.09 ft2 (0.566 m2), physically larger than the Hayabusa, which is 6.01 ft2 (0.558 m2 ). But the advantage for the Suzuki is not just in frontal area. With figures for both drag and frontal area, it's possible to calculate the coefficient of drag, which is 0.603 for the 12R and 0.561 for the Hayabusa. The winner of this wind tunnel shootout is the Suzuki. It's worth remembering, however, that neither of these CD figures indicate a particularly impressive degree of streamlining, since even a typical passenger car has a CD of less than 0.60 and some models are lower than 0.30. A fully streamlined Bonneville speed-record bike might have a CD of 0.10. Such is the nature of streetbikes, where performance derives mostly from extreme power-to-weight ratios.