You know what would be cool...

[asdffdsa]

... if lamborghini made a motorcycle! It would be so awesome! It would definalty kick all other motocycles butts.

[Racing Rice]

Ducati is close.

[chubster2003]

Well in my mind the Dacati is the Lamborghini of the motorcycle world.. and they are awesome.. and they do kick some serious butt

[MARS]

IMO there's better bikes than Ducati 998's on the road! Gsxr1000 & R1 just to name a couple! Don't get me wrong, I would love to own a 998!

[Z_Fanatic]

sportbikes these days handle good as any Lambo cars, if not better. as for power and acceleration, bikes win, hands down.

sorry same goes for Ducati, 4-cylinders has the edge when it comes to power. but Ducati still has its place for producing twins and competing against Japanese sportbikes.

funny thing is, I can use that money I'd save on a house.

[asdffdsa]

I agree the ducati is pretty nice... but, if Lamborghini made a motorcycle it would be awesome. People would probably buy it for $30,000 more than a ducati even if they had the exact same engine just because it has the lambo symbol.

[speediva]

I wouldn't spend $30 on a Duc let alone $30,000 more than a Duc just b/c Lambo put a sticker on it. Sorry.



But a TRUE Lambo car could be interesting... unless they screwed it up like Dodge and the Tomahawk.

[R1-rider]

The dodge tomahawk isn't even a motorcycle, it is a suicidal ATV.

The MV Agusta F4 Senna is the equivalent to what an exotic sports car would be as a motorcycle (tangie will definetely agree).

[speediva]

Mmmmmmm :drool: MV Agusta!








On another note: HI R1!!!! We've missed you!!!!

[TachiTJRS]

Sports bikes or even Moto GP bikes cannot outhandle good sports cars in corners. This is a fact. Look at the lap times for F1 cars versus moto GP bikes. Although having similar power per cc ratios and better power to weight, bikes still do laps around 10-20 secs slower than four wheels.

[Z_Fanatic]

F-1 or street legal F1-inspired chasis exotic cars are a bit different than your typical $200K Ferrari. Comparing those 360/430 Modenas to Moto GP bikes is questionable. Comparing it to street sportbikes, it's a matter of who's more skilled, but the bike would outdrag it nonetheless until Ferrari reaches over 140+ mph.

F1 cars are loaded with traction controlling technology that aren't available for bikes, plus downforce wings and self-stable chasis allows them to handle the g-force better than bikes. But Moto GP bikes are catching up having introduced 990 cc 4-strokes and smoother chasis to handle the power. All of this has no bearing on street vehicles where sportbikes and sportscars come to play, as F-1 cars cost multi-million dollars, and Moto GP bikes range from half a million to over a million. There's more resources invested in R&D for F-1 cars than bikes, just look at Suzuki, they are always playing catch up with bigger manufacturers like Honda, Yamaha has Rossi, and Aprilia seems to be off the grid. And Ducati and Kawasaki just began to get recognition.

[TachiTJRS]

I agree with your notion on money spent on technology to corner faster in regards to 4 or 2 wheels on the world stage.

However, my point is that for a given car and bike on roughly the same level, the law of physics gives 4 wheels an advantage in cornering speeds. a motorcycle will have to cut speed much more than cars going into a corner. While driver and rider skill counts somewhat, remember that the working with a bike requires more lean angle which goes up with speed and this cannot be avoided compared to a car with the option to design a chassis that resists roll and stabilses traction from a suspension design that works upright 85% of the time.

[aussieidiot]

i remember reading an article in which they pitted a WRX in the hands of a british rally champ versus an R1 in the hands of a BSB rider.

they had to deal with all sorts of "normal" traffic problems like roundabouts, pedestrians, traffic, high speed runs and anything the writers could think of to throw at them.

basically they came out even except for the WRX wore its tyres out completely while the R1 used approx 50%

the wrx could lap quicker around a roundabout than the R1

[Z_Fanatic]

Originally Posted by TachiTJRS

I agree with your notion on money spent on technology to corner faster in regards to 4 or 2 wheels on the world stage.

However, my point is that for a given car and bike on roughly the same level, the law of physics gives 4 wheels an advantage in cornering speeds. a motorcycle will have to cut speed much more than cars going into a corner. While driver and rider skill counts somewhat, remember that the working with a bike requires more lean angle which goes up with speed and this cannot be avoided compared to a car with the option to design a chassis that resists roll and stabilses traction from a suspension design that works upright 85% of the time.

I agree, 4 wheels provide much more options than two wheels, but I think the driver of the car driver needs to better than the rider on two wheels. Because sportscars still have higher tendency to understeer or oversteer or mainly spin out with too much throttle, although they are able to carry more speed on the corner. With bikes, go slow and come out fast, it helps maintain the lean, never threatening to break unless the rider goes in too hot, still one could lean it a bit more. Given that I don't have $200K Ferrari, I can say confidently say I am progressing towards being faster on a bike in a curve than my car.

Nice bike btw.

[o|||||||o]

I agree with the comments on skill level. It is all based on rider / driver ability when you are comparing machines of this nature. A 1969 VW Beetle will whoop on a MV Augusta if you put a pro-quality driver behind the wheel and a first-year rookie on the bike.

There are too many factors to consider here to make generalized statements.

Just my $.02

-Bill