Tim.Wright wrote:You need to be careful with Nuerburgring times. You never know what the start and end points are.
That's true, of course. Anyone is free to compare the two side by side though:
Nissan GT-R full-lap 7:24
R1 BTG 7:10
You can easily run them side by side in two browser windows. Two things become apparent quite quick; The Nissan is mighty in the corners and overal grip levels, as well as braking. And; the way the R1 is being driven right at the very limit... stunning. The Nissan video looks like a walk-in-the-park comparatively.
And in reply to emaren's last post in the meanwhile; I'm not sure where that R1 ever lifted to brake due to speed limits. Traffic wasn't an issue either. So the video is as representative as any other. And in the end, it's just the 2+2 seat 1740kg heavy Nissan. I could have picked the Zonda-R lap time, or the newer GT-R video. That was besides the point though and in the end, I really can't be bothered about which posted a better time, because I don't care either way. I'm merely interested in a constructive discussion on the why and where.
emaren;
The Ducati and McLaren video illustrates the point rather nicely and has been exactly as I always said. The majority of tracks I've driven on have even slower (tighter) corners, so the difference is even greater. Still, in that very video on that particular track, the Ducati in the end beat the McLaren by 1.6seconds. Considering how much quicker the Ducati is in a straightline, again, the only logical conclusion is that the McLaren must be making up most of its time in the corners in which the McLaren is quicker. And under braking. The 'Ring is a nice comparison metric, as it is closer to a real world typical b-road scenerio. Slower corners, relatively bumpy, fast straights etc. Most other tracks (especially in some of the videos that you've linked) feature what I consitute as higher speed corners in which bikes prevail unless you may be pitting them against extremer machinery with downforce and higher power/weight ratios. This isn't wrong per say; it's just important to understand why and where bikes excel. The better times they achieve on some tracks vs. wrose times on other tracks are simply a logical conclusion to the matter. Nothing more, nothing less.
If you don't limit cars by road legality or type, then even on a track that is tailored explicitly to the advantages of a bike could probably be beaten in a dedicated car (high downforce, grippy tires, high power/weight). That's just the nature of it. Most of the time, the biggest limiting factor on bikes is going to be the rider himself, not the bike, as I'm sure you yourself can appreciate. The R1 video on the ring above demonstrates this nicely; a lockup, a bump in the wrong place, a small error here or there and the likely result is death. Even if we assume a rider extracting the maximum from his bike, the bike still faces some inherent disadvantages in braking and slow/-tight corners. Bumpy roads. Turns that mandate fast left/right weight shifts. On the other hand, you have brutal fast acceleration, power-to-weight ratios that far exceed even most hypercars. On most tracks, this advantage on its own will see that bikes beat most cars, even if the cars in question might be quicker in some or the majority of corners.
