Quote:
Firebird turbo Busa will whop the Veyron in a straight line. 0-60, top speed, you name it, turbo on turbo, bye-bye Veyron.
|
I know that, but look at the diff in power to weight between the 2 machines. It still doesn't prove, that a bike with the same power to weight ratio as that of a car (even if you consider the driver/rider) can match it. Quote:
Yeah I know I went off topic but this was important, now coming to which ones wastes more power(I am excluding the driver/rider on this): I would say that bikes waste lesser power due to the design of the mechs and lesser moving parts as compared to anything on 4 wheels. ( % wise, I wouldnt even bother as they do not match up on an equal scale)
|
We're not just considering the power reaching the wheels. It's the % of power reaching the wheels which can be converted into acceleration.
A bike has less power, but less weight to carry too. Thats where power to weight comes in.
And about the 2 F1 car example. Yes i agree with you, that the car with the body shell and downforce will be quicker but, thats got everything to do with the design flaw on the other car.
The fact is, that F1 cars don't run that way. If they did, then i'd agree that cars waste more % of their power. Cars can be made to waste more power but, by default, they're not meant to do so.
U say power to weight is not important. Then how would you pit 2 equal machines? Based on their power output? (even thought the first car weighs twice the other one?). Quote:
how about putting them on a drag strip? Why restrict the test to a circuit?
|
Then, how about giving them the same power to weight ratios (including the driver/rider). U wont bcoz you know the bike wont come anywhere close to the car bcoz, it's not able to that power to weight as well as the car. PS: Guys, please don't take any of this personally. Lets look at it as a technical discussion and not as a way of discriminating machines.
Shan2nu
Last edited by Shan2nu : 23rd January 2006 at 18:42.
|