maomao
普費斯
Tbf you certainly give the impression of being far too much of a flaky alkie to have ridden that bike and lived so who knows. But you're definitely complicit.
Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
David Clapson
Well-Known Member
I had a Hayabusa for a while. I joined a club for bikers who want to reach 200 mph. We'd rent an airfield and some timing equipment. I saw 204 mph on the clocks but the radar said it was 187. This was typical for a well prepared bike with stock engine internals and an average sized rider. The only guy who could get 200 from a bike with stock internals was a very skinny shortarse with close-fitting unpadded leathers and a drastically lowered suspension. He did lots of other little things to cut drag, such as pushing the brake pistons into the calipers before every run. But the key was the lowered suspension, which also made the bike unrideable on the road.
That's probably a bit too much detail for this thread, so I'll stop now.
That's probably a bit too much detail for this thread, so I'll stop now.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
It takes a lot of power to push through the air at that speed. You need over 200bhp to get there on a Hayabusa.I had a Hayabusa for a while. I joined a club for bikers who want to reach 200 mph. We'd rent an airfield and some timing equipment. I saw 204 mph on the clocks but the radar said it was 187. This was typical for a well prepared bike with stock engine internals and an average sized rider. The only guy who could get 200 from a bike with stock internals was a very skinny shortarse with close-fitting unpadded leathers and a drastically lowered suspension. He did lots of other little things to cut drag, such as pushing the brake pistons into the calipers before every run. But the key was the lowered suspension, which also made the bike unrideable on the road.
That's probably a bit too much detail for this thread, so I'll stop now.
David Clapson
Well-Known Member
It's all about aerodynamics. If you can't get your drag right down you can throw a ton of money at extra bhp and get (almost) nowhere. You'd think bikers would be well aware of this, what with all the speed record history, but they're always banging on about engine tuning.
This guy managed 150 with about 95 bhp in 1948:
This guy did 214 mph with 100 bhp in 1956:
This guy did 83 on this bicycle in 2013:
This guy managed 150 with about 95 bhp in 1948:
This guy did 214 mph with 100 bhp in 1956:
This guy did 83 on this bicycle in 2013:
Last edited:
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Weren't we talking about the Hayabusa?It's all about aerodynamics. If you can't get your drag right down you can throw a ton of money at extra bhp and get (almost) nowhere. You'd think bikers would be well aware of this, what with all the speed record history, but they're always banging on about engine tuning.
This guy managed 150 with about 95 bhp in 1948:
This guy did 214 mph with 100 bhp in 1956:
This guy did 83 on this bicycle in 2013:
David Clapson
Well-Known Member
Yes. I explained how you could reach 200 on a Hayabusa with a stock motor if you improved the aerodynamics. Then you displayed your natural talent for grasping the wrong end of the stick by saying you needed more than 200 bhp.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Nope, I was talking about you on your Hayabusa. You said the most you got was 187, so I replied saying you'd need over 200bhp to reach 200. I worked it out based on your figures, it wasn't that difficult. Would you like me to teach you how to calculate it?
I guess one of us did get the wrong end of the stick.
maomao
普費斯
David Clapson
Well-Known Member
Not interested. Let's try to get the thread on topic. You trolled it, I steered it gently back with aerodynamics and a bicycle which does 83 mph. Over to you. If you want to be constructive and clever with your numbers you could look at recent SUV sales and calculate the savings in energy if smaller cars had been bought instead.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
It's nuts that it's somehow considered ok to let vehicles capable of anything even approaching 200mph go anywhere near a public road. The evidence that you can't leave things to individual judgement was posted (and removed) from this thread today. Some people freak out when I compare it to gun ownership. The norms are so screwed up that it seems fine to have a joke about speeding and a bit of nudge nudge wink wink only joking boast about it.
Maybe we can have some jokey banter about school shootings next.
Maybe we can have some jokey banter about school shootings next.
David Clapson
Well-Known Member
Well proven by recent sales of SUVs in the UK, which caused the nation to miss a significant emissions target. It's interesting that the forecasters didn't see this coming. They were outfoxed by car industry marketing and the lure of big cars as status symbols. It's depressing that the wall to wall media coverage of climate breakdown/Greta Thunberg for a number of years had no effect on the buying decisions of the people who really, really want a Range Rover. I hate to say it, but we need even more legislation.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
nick
Pleomorphic Adenomas R us
187 on a Hayabusa? lightweight.
Back to the topic of this thread.
That is only 4mph faster than a bicycle -
BBC: "We weren't supposed to go more than 175."
Back to the topic of this thread.
That is only 4mph faster than a bicycle -
BBC: "We weren't supposed to go more than 175."
nick
Pleomorphic Adenomas R us
Or 335 kph on rollers
Bruce Bursford - Wikipedia
Although the poor bloke was taken out by a lorry 21 years ago
BBC News | UK | Record-breaking cyclist killed
Bruce Bursford - Wikipedia
Although the poor bloke was taken out by a lorry 21 years ago
BBC News | UK | Record-breaking cyclist killed
liquidindian
Hello
Trains.
David Clapson
Well-Known Member
Motorbikes. Much more freedom, cross the country in half the time, modest emissions, minimal impact on others if you're careful.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I thought that motorbikes did better on fuel consumption, so better on carbon emissions, but were pretty bad for pollutants, mainly because there isn't enough space to put all the stuff that there is on modern cars that tries to minimise air pollutants.
Or maybe that info is now out of date.
They are pretty bad for noise pollution though. Is that just because they are made noisy to appeal to a certain type of customer, or is it inevitable?
Or maybe that info is now out of date.
They are pretty bad for noise pollution though. Is that just because they are made noisy to appeal to a certain type of customer, or is it inevitable?
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
The happy medium is of course a balanced approach, with a continuous drive to curb individual behaviour that overall contributes to pollution and less other desirable effects, but without the need to outright ban any given mode of transportation, or demonise all those who use it without taking into account how often and how sensibly they use it.
That is why reasonable measures to promote more environmentally friendly modes of transportation over cars are to be encouraged if thought to be effective and not too punitive, but extreme measures such as banning all cars from towns and cities are way excessive, unnecessary and for the most part vindictive by those proposing them.
Nothing needs to be banned. We just need to do less of it.
farmerbarleymow
I'm Petee's spirit animal
It's not extreme to ban cars from towns and cities, certainly not the cores of them. Demolish the multistorey car parks and use the land for something better.
Athos
Well-Known Member
A few of the big manufacturers are looking at having banks of swappable, universal batteries, now. That'd make electric bikes attractive for commuting - no range issues, no long waits charging, no noise, no emissions, take up less space, less dangerous to pedestrians, yet still more convenient than public transport in many instances.
(Though you'd still need the 'Busa for the weekend blasts, of course.)
Last edited:
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Move out of the city.
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
Judging by the attitudes from the petrolheads on this forum, people need to be forced to change their behaviours, as they won’t do it otherwise
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
Well it obviously changes from city to city, but in central London there are very few multi-storey car parks, and far fewer people who drive into central London and park there. So which cars do you ban? If you ban all private cars in London, you will find that most of Zone 1 will still be 80% full of motor vehicles. Because most of them are Ubers, club cars, taxis, delivery vans, trade vehicles, lorries, and various other types that are not private owned.
What next? Ban all club cars? Still lots left. Ban all Ubers and private hire vehicles? That's going to be really helpful to millions of people who have to take a journey that for any number of reasons is not viable to do by other methods.
And even after then you still have thousands of van and lorry deliveries of heavier items, and trade repair vehicles that simply cannot be replaced by bicycles, no matter how much some might wish otherwise. So you've taken the yes, extreme measure of banning cars and private hire/ taxis from a massive area, only to find out that there's still plenty of motor traffic around.
So yes. Small pedestrian zones exist already everywhere, including a few in London. But a city-wide private car exclusion would be an extreme meausre simply because it would not solve remove motor traffic from London, only reduce it by a modest percentage. That model might work in some small towns somewhere in the world. Will never work in London, no matter how people stomp their foot pretending otherwise.
Cid
Proper break this time
I was going to write quite a long post explaining why just limiting vehicle use doesn’t make sense, but thanks - you’ve done it for me. You can’t just say ‘we’ll limit car use a bit’ because the nature of transport infrastructure means people will keep on using them. That’s exactly why you need to ban or severely restrict vehicle use and redesign your infrastructure around effective alternatives.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Contrary to T&P's numbers pulled out of thin air, not far off 50% of the vehicles entering the London congestion charge zone are privately owned cars.
The numbers of taxis and PHVs are also very significant and I'd want to reduce their use too. That means keeping them available for people who really need them (like those with disabilities for whom public transport is not an option) and making them less attractive for those who could actually just use public transport instead.
On occasion I've had to bite my tongue when I've been part of a group which has decided to get an uber for a journey within central London which actually would have been quicker if we'd just taken the tube.
The numbers of taxis and PHVs are also very significant and I'd want to reduce their use too. That means keeping them available for people who really need them (like those with disabilities for whom public transport is not an option) and making them less attractive for those who could actually just use public transport instead.
On occasion I've had to bite my tongue when I've been part of a group which has decided to get an uber for a journey within central London which actually would have been quicker if we'd just taken the tube.
souljacker
innit
I'm glad you have finally admitted that you are a mere keyboard warrior who doesn't practice in real life what he preaches on here. I bet you have a TV in the bedroom and no lock on your lavvy door.
Cid
Proper break this time
I should add I’m not that pro public transport. I mean as we have found out recently there are some er… problems with hundreds of people sharing the same enclosed space. Although that is also clearly a problem with PHVs and shared vehicles. But properly thought-out infrastructure should be able to provide for light electric vehicles alongside mass transit. Could potentially even make things modular.
e2a: and obviously reclaiming road infrastructure means you can reconfigure the approach to public transport a fair bit.
e.g (weird choice of music, but hey)
e2a: and obviously reclaiming road infrastructure means you can reconfigure the approach to public transport a fair bit.
e.g (weird choice of music, but hey)
Last edited:
