Ducati 1098S .vs. Nissan GT-R at Cadwell

[Mort]

This is good.... at my fave track too.

Autocar

what he doesn't mention is that the track is pretty damp and the 4WD car will handle that better than the bike.... Interesting though..

[Veracocha]

Good video but same old crap.....the 1098 is capable of lapping in 1:34 around cadwell park in dry conditions. There is just no point in comparing the two in wet/damp conitions as the bike on supercorsas wont be braking hard or leaning in with much conviction.

Hopefully they will do some in the dry next time where conditions also suit the bike!

[Scotty]

Stop being such a grumpy fecker!

Always nice to see a head to head comparison even though we all know it proves nothing

Edited December 17, 2008 by Scotty

[Veracocha]

The comparason is a good thing obviously - better to have it than not at all! 1:44 at Cadwell is a slow lap time for a bike like that though, so the comparason and they guys comments about the bike not being able to compete in corners and under braking are larely redundant.

[Scotty]

Actually I totally agree. It didn't look that warm and the wet etc all favoured the car. And of course there's always the trusted biker fall back : "yeah but I could buy 10 bikes for the price of that car"

[Veracocha]

I think the problem is that bikes are a lot more needy than cars, like there is no point in even trying to ride quickly in the wet without wet tyres. Also in the cold, decent race tyres have virtually no grip until up to temp.

Cars are much more 'get in and go' which is why they often come out better than bikes as the comparisons seem to be run by the car guys who seem to stack the odds against the bike. Why did Autocar even bother putting the Caterham R500 vs a Ducati Desmo (sp?) on a twisty road circuit? How about a Fiesta ST vs a Yamaha R1?

In the end the fastest cars are quicker than the fastest bikes by some margin. But bikes are better, just unfortunately less of the time.

That being said, even when the bike looses I still hope to see more comparisons it's great fun.

[danksy]

I thought this was actually quite well balanced. The last 15 seconds of the clip really shows the acceleration of the Duke :notworthy:

[garcon magnifique]

Always good fun to see a comparison, but I agree with what many have said - it's pretty pointless trying to read much into it.

In terms of pure physics, the extra footprint of a car should in theory mean better cornering and braking if it isn't cancelled out by the additional weight.

One thing I know from real world roads such as the Cat & Fiddle is that a quick car will probably reel in the bikes on the twisty sections but there's obviously no point trying to compete on the straights. For me that only really proves one thing - not that my car's quicker than a bike on the twisties, but that it's alot easier (and less risky if you do it right!) to drive a car quickly than ride a bike quickly.