Writing an article on top 10 fastest bikes avaliable.

[02SE]

I would like to see the tomahawk in person, I like the way it looks however when it was first spoke of Dodge claimed 300mph..

I remember a letter to one of the motorcycle magazines.

Dodge had claimed it could reach those speeds NOT FACTORING IN AERODYNAMICS.  

The letter writer wrote in that his lawnmower could do 250 mph, if you didn't factor in aerodynamics.      

[SPEED KING]

O2SE that's what I'm talkin about...

[suzuki4life]

yeah well In Dodge's defense they did basically what every motorcycle producer does, they lied. they figured somethign weighing this much with this much hp can go this fast in theory figuring no one would ever actually be able to try it.

its kinda like Yamaha claiming their 99 R6 used to make 120hp per liter. Its a slight of the hand in an ideal setting at best.

[Hank]

I would like to see the tomahawk in person, I like the way it looks however when it was first spoke of Dodge claimed 300mph..

That was BEFORE Dr. Turbos kanooter valve,and you know it.!

[SPEED KING]

I would like to see the tomahawk in person, I like the way it looks however when it was first spoke of Dodge claimed 300mph..

That was BEFORE Dr. Turbos kanooter valve,and you know it.!

Yes I forgot about that, I am "gently" reminded...

[YAG]

I would like to see the tomahawk in person, I like the way it looks however when it was first spoke of Dodge claimed 300mph..

That was BEFORE Dr. Turbos kanooter valve,and you know it.!

Yes I forgot about that, I am "gently" reminded...

[Hank]

I apologise John.I just get a little carried away thinking of all the work that Dr.Turbo has put in to his products.The quality of the plenum alone leaves you breathless.

[02SE]

Hank, the sincerity in your statement almost brings a tear to my eye.  

[Twisted]

Top speed....stock
1999-2000 Suzuki Hayabusa 194mph
2000-2001 Kawasaki ZX12 189mph
2004-ZX10 186MPH
2004-Yamaha R1 184mph
2004-Suzuki GSXR1000 180mph
1997-2004 Honda CBR1100XX 178mph
1992-1999 Kawasaki ZX11 176mph
1989-1991 Kawasaki ZX10 170mph
2004-GSXR 750 168mph
1994-1997 GSXR1100 167mph


This is off the top of my head...figures should be close.
Y2K is not a readily available bike especially for those of us that don't have $150,000 to spend.
Tell ya what let us spend $30,000 on a Hayabusa, and it'll spank a Y2K into the next State....or any other bike for that matter with it's 500+++ horsepower

wud about the new triumph busa killer? posed to do about 180?

do you mean "mass" produced, or limited?

[havabusa12r]

Top speed....stock
1999-2000 Suzuki Hayabusa 194mph
2000-2001 Kawasaki ZX12 189mph
2004-ZX10 186MPH
2004-Yamaha R1 184mph
2004-Suzuki GSXR1000 180mph
1997-2004 Honda CBR1100XX 178mph
1992-1999 Kawasaki ZX11 176mph
1989-1991 Kawasaki ZX10 170mph
2004-GSXR 750 168mph
1994-1997 GSXR1100 167mph


This is off the top of my head...figures should be close.
Y2K is not a readily available bike especially for those of us that don't have $150,000 to spend.
Tell ya what let us spend $30,000 on a Hayabusa, and it'll spank a Y2K into the next State....or any other bike for that matter with it's 500+++ horsepower

wud about the new triumph busa killer? posed to do about 180?

Triumph pulled the plug on that project / bike.  The last spy picture that I saw was Tri PUSHING it back into the factory and calling it DEAD.

wud about the new triumph busa killer? posed to do about 180?



do you mean "mass" produced, or limited?

[SPEED KING]

I am just wondering though...he says the fastest...but does he mean the fastest TOP END speed?

Many definitions of fast.

1/8mile
1/4 mile
1 mile standing or flying
2 mile standing
60-80 roll-on
0-100

Maybe he is just looking for top end speed.  However...I would not consider the Y2K at all...as it is not a mass production and readily available bike.  

Just like saying that the Busa is the fastest mass production vehicle on the planet...well...it is...but if you throw out the "mass production", then you start bringing in Enzo's, F1's, etc...and stock for stock, they will whip a Busa in top end speed...

There is only one definition of FAST...top speed..and one definition of QUICK quarter mile....

[Falcon-A]

Dodge claims the tomahawk piece of shit is supposed to do 250mph.
But they can't even drive it up and down the street at 35 and turn around with out it falling over.  

show me a picture of it on the ground? I have seen one first hand and they look pretty cool, they sound badass, BUT I would still never own one.

 
 First off, yes it did tip over!  If you would have read the articles on it, you would know that!
 
 And second off, why would a company like Chysler try and make a motorcycle, when it can't even get a pickup truck to exceed 12 miles to the gallon??
 
 And as far as the original question is concerned, "which bikes are the fastest, " The guys here have the answer.
 My question is, What kind of article are you going to write? I sure hope it isn't meant to make these bikes to be too dangerous for the public!
 What you have to factor in, is these bikes not only go fast, but they have the ability to handle and brake also.
 I see guys building monster bikes, with huge V-twins, weighing in at 800+ lbs, with little to no brakes, and absolutely NO handling ability whatsoever!!
 So don't go writing some bullshit about bikes being too fast, without mentioning other bikes that come from the factory with insufficient brakes and suspensions for the weight of these pigs (harley) making them equally dangerous for both riders, and the general public sharing the road with them!
 Just my .02 worth

[pollorecords]

This thread is the best source of info on the subject I could find on the net.

Thanks everyone!

Just to make some stuff clear:

1.  Yes, when I say fast bikes, I mean "top speed". I know this is not the only way of measuring, and it would probably be better to average top speed with 0-100, 0-200, etc. But since this is only a ranking for a "Guinness Book-like" magazine (and I won't have much space to explain the criteria of the ranking), I'll only use top speed.

2. No, I won't say "too many people are dying with these outstanding speeds". The article is about the technology and the greatness of today's bikes.

Cheers,
Leo

[BCRBusa]

I am just wondering though...he says the fastest...but does he mean the fastest TOP END speed?

Many definitions of fast.

1/8mile
1/4 mile
1 mile standing or flying
2 mile standing
60-80 roll-on
0-100

Maybe he is just looking for top end speed.  However...I would not consider the Y2K at all...as it is not a mass production and readily available bike.  

Just like saying that the Busa is the fastest mass production vehicle on the planet...well...it is...but if you throw out the "mass production", then you start bringing in Enzo's, F1's, etc...and stock for stock, they will whip a Busa in top end speed...

There is only one definition of FAST...top speed..and one definition of QUICK quarter mile....

Thanks John        

[BCRBusa]

Top speed....stock
1999-2000 Suzuki Hayabusa 194mph
2000-2001 Kawasaki ZX12 189mph
2004-ZX10 186MPH
2004-Yamaha R1 184mph
2004-Suzuki GSXR1000 180mph
1997-2004 Honda CBR1100XX 178mph
1992-1999 Kawasaki ZX11 176mph
1989-1991 Kawasaki ZX10 170mph
2004-GSXR 750 168mph
1994-1997 GSXR1100 167mph


This is off the top of my head...figures should be close.
Y2K is not a readily available bike especially for those of us that don't have $150,000 to spend.
Tell ya what let us spend $30,000 on a Hayabusa, and it'll spank a Y2K into the next State....or any other bike for that matter with it's 500+++ horsepower

wud about the new triumph busa killer? posed to do about 180?

do you mean "mass" produced, or limited?

LOL....forgot about that one

[pollorecords]

[suzuki4life]

Top speed....stock
1999-2000 Suzuki Hayabusa 194mph
2000-2001 Kawasaki ZX12 189mph
2004-ZX10 186MPH
2004-Yamaha R1 184mph
2004-Suzuki GSXR1000 180mph
1997-2004 Honda CBR1100XX 178mph
1992-1999 Kawasaki ZX11 176mph
1989-1991 Kawasaki ZX10 170mph
2004-GSXR 750 168mph
1994-1997 GSXR1100 167mph


This is off the top of my head...figures should be close.
Y2K is not a readily available bike especially for those of us that don't have $150,000 to spend.
Tell ya what let us spend $30,000 on a Hayabusa, and it'll spank a Y2K into the next State....or any other bike for that matter with it's 500+++ horsepower

wud about the new triumph busa killer? posed to do about 180?

do you mean "mass" produced, or limited?

"truimph busa killer" was never produced. it was a one off. Even speaking of it would would hafta put the countless number of big turbo bikes at the head of the pack.

[suzuki4life]

[quote="Falcon-A]
 First off, yes it did tip over!  If you would have read the articles on it, you would know that!
 
 And second off, why would a company like Chysler try and make a motorcycle, when it can't even get a pickup truck to exceed 12 miles to the gallon??
 
 [/quote]

First off, I have read allot of bullshit in magazines that wasn't true. Bike didn't appear to be "dropped". Its suspension made it look like that in itself would be a real feat to behold. PLUS for as much as it weighs it should of had some pretty noticable damage you would think?

Second, who fucking cares what kind of MPG a dodge truck gets? problem with people is they started using trucks for daily drivers instead of the work horses they are intended to be. Now they hafta be pretty, get good mpg, be comfy and wipe your vaginas for you bitches. last REAL truck i drove was lucky to get 4 MPG at highway speeds.  

[Falcon-A]

[quote="Falcon-A]
 First off, yes it did tip over!  If you would have read the articles on it, you would know that!
 
 And second off, why would a company like Chysler try and make a motorcycle, when it can't even get a pickup truck to exceed 12 miles to the gallon??
 
 

First off, I have read allot of bullshit in magazines that wasn't true. Bike didn't appear to be "dropped". Its suspension made it look like that in itself would be a real feat to behold. PLUS for as much as it weighs it should of had some pretty noticable damage you would think?

Second, who fucking cares what kind of MPG a dodge truck gets? problem with people is they started using trucks for daily drivers instead of the work horses they are intended to be. Now they hafta be pretty, get good mpg, be comfy and wipe your vaginas for you bitches. last REAL truck i drove was lucky to get 4 MPG at highway speeds.  [/quote]


 My point that I was trying to make, that seemed to elude you, is that Chrysler should stick to TRYING to build cars and trucks, and leave the motorcycles to companies that know what they are doing!
 How hideous to use such a retarded engine in a car, much less a bike!
 Pushrods are just a tad outdated wouldn't you say?
 And after driving the all new "hemi" for 120 miles,  I have to say this:  

[02SE]

Jamie, produce some proof. That is the bottom line.

There have been members here who have reportedly seen 196-197 mph out of bone stock Busas, using GPS. Namely some of the Florida 9/10 th's guys.

I didn't mention those, because they aren't official records. That is the reality. I know you have a hard time accepting it.

The fastest record for a stock bike at Maxton is held by a Busa, ridden and owned by a member of this board, Scott Guthrie.

Even the guys that ride 12's there, and are also members here, will tell you that is so.

BTW, how is the clutch holding up in your turbo ZX-12 that can't even exceed 200 mph?.  

[oilheadron]

Pollorecords, read the oldie thread below for some real documented history on Hayabusa performance/records/etc. And notice that ALL of these records still stand. And then wait for some kind of documentation from FK backing up his wild claims (Hint: you won't see any!!)  

Second hint: These records were set many months after the ZX-12 was in full production and on the roads.

Third hint: You may hear from less-informed '12 faithful that the '12 was limited from the beginning of production (MY 2000). Absolutely not true, as confirmed by Kawasaki themselves.

Fourth hint: As 02SE alluded to, stock bike ZX-12 owners just basically stopped showing up at the informal 9/10 races in Florida after being humiliated time and time again.

Here's the link:

http://www.suzukihayabusa.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=27486&highlight=records

[02SE]

FK wrote:

And remember the Busas gearing runs out at 195/196

Wrong. they are geared for about 202 at redline in 6th. They just don't have the power to pull that stock.

Who said anything about magazines, I'm talking about people(Florida 9/10th's guys) just going out and running their stock bikes to see what they can do. Those are their claims, which as I said I didn't mention previously because they aren't official records.

But the records at Maxton, and at Bonneville for bone stock bikes are held by Busas. And those ARE official records.  

[oilheadron]

Sigh.

If I was a manufacturer building a motorcycle that was DESIGNED FROM THE VERY START TO BE THE FASTEST MOTORCYCLE IN THE WORLD EVER, with maybe the biggest fanfare in the history of motorcycle introductions, as the '12 was, AND I KNEW IT WAS THE FASTEST, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't sleep until a couple of guys were hired to go ride it around a track and take these impressive records back.   The fact of the matter is that Suzuki simply caught Kawa napping when the Busa was introduced fairly quietly with modest claims that it would exceed 186 mph. By how much was a surprise to the entire industry.



And these aren't even all the records that the team set:

"In August 2000, a Pirelli-backed team took a showroom standard GSX1300R Suzuki Hayabusa to the banked oval Nardo course in Italy and ended up with no less than 10 world records. They started off with a world record 198.113 km/h for a measured kilometre from a standing start then backed that up with a 306.598 km/h pass through a measured kilometre, this time with a flying start.

Six more world records were established before the Italians concluded with new distance records for six hours (1618.550 km) and 12 hours (3043.566 km), with average speeds of 269.758 km/h and 253.630 km/h respectively.

Five years on, those records are still intact. Which just shows what a technical tour de force the Suzuki Hayabusa represents."

[suzuki4life]

[quote="Falcon-A]
 First off, yes it did tip over!  If you would have read the articles on it, you would know that!
 
 And second off, why would a company like Chysler try and make a motorcycle, when it can't even get a pickup truck to exceed 12 miles to the gallon??
 
 

First off, I have read allot of bullshit in magazines that wasn't true. Bike didn't appear to be "dropped". Its suspension made it look like that in itself would be a real feat to behold. PLUS for as much as it weighs it should of had some pretty noticable damage you would think?

Second, who fucking cares what kind of MPG a dodge truck gets? problem with people is they started using trucks for daily drivers instead of the work horses they are intended to be. Now they hafta be pretty, get good mpg, be comfy and wipe your vaginas for you bitches. last REAL truck i drove was lucky to get 4 MPG at highway speeds.  

 My point that I was trying to make, that seemed to elude you, is that Chrysler should stick to TRYING to build cars and trucks, and leave the motorcycles to companies that know what they are doing!
 How hideous to use such a retarded engine in a car, much less a bike!
 Pushrods are just a tad outdated wouldn't you say?
 And after driving the all new "hemi" for 120 miles,  I have to say this:  [/quote]


well the pictures don't do it justice. See oen yourself in person and I believe your opinion will change.

[oilheadron]

FK, you still here??