First of all it is SW's Supra not the the SW supra. His car is setup more for drag racing than the Walser Supra belonging to Darren Strunk. The Walser Supra has massive top end. If you have ever seen any of the other videos of him racing, the other car always shoots out ahead and he blasts past them after 100 or so. His top end is evident when he ran an 11.1 @141. If you have seen the video of the Walser supra racing the modded busa you can see that the busa was pulling away slightly. This was a legitimate claim on Pluto's part. Way to go Steve!! Imagine the outcome if he was spraying too??

You can see the info on SW's, Clint's and Darren's cars here

http://www.turboimports.com/turcar.html

 

First off to Pluto, good kill. Your car sounds hella impressive. I'd like to see some pics if you have time to post them.

2nd, let's not turn this into a Supra vs RX-7 debate. This thread was posted to recognize an achievment, not to beat an already dead horse.

Lastly to BOOSTEDRX7... i'm not even sure if I should bother addressing you or not. I tried to make sense of your post, but it's pretty difficult. One long *** sentence, with misspelled words, etc. I can't see how you can get off calling someone else a moron, with a post like that.

I THINK what your saying is that it is impossible for a Supra to make those kinds of #s on a stock bottom end. I can't speak from personal experience at the 7800+ hp range, but I have SEVERAL friends here in Ohio that are making 600-700 hp on a stock bottom end. No cams, no head work, stock intake manifold. One is making 525 WHP on stock fuel. Just swapped in a bigger turbo. As far as all the internet claims, seeing as how there are so many, I don't see a reason for people to lie about it. Seems kind of paranoid to have that type of consiracy theory going on.

Now am I saying that it is impossible for a Supra motor to break? No I am not. If you abuse and engine, and don't maintain it correctly of course it's going to go to ****.

As far as RX-7 motos go. I view people's perception of those as being in line with how Turbo cars were viewed in the early 80s. In the early 80's turbo cars were viewed as unreliable. This was because people didn't understand their care. Time the Turbo down, keep the oil changed, etc. It's the same IMO with the RX-7. If you know how to maintain the car, it will last. You do have to be very careful when tuning it though because it doesn't handle detonation well at all. You just have to be smart.

Any car in the hands of an idiot will break. How many Supras did you say you popped?

Lastly, Brian is a friend of mine, he is heavy into the performance scene her in Columbus. He doesn't own a Supra, but he knows quite a few of the same people I do. The only reason Walzer, Clint, etc were mentioned was to support Pluto's claim that a car can beat a bike. Get over your insecurities. No one even came close to taking a dump on RX-7s in this post.

Howard
1994 Supra Turbo
1986 RX-7 (for sale)
1994 Ford Probe JDM motr
Looking for FD Project car

 

One last thing.

Let's not clutter Pluto's post with this crap anymore. Start a new thread if you want to continue this crap, or feel free to email me.

threerock@hotmail.com

 

Nice kill pluto...the only bike I ever beat was some 500cc piece of crap. Anyway, quick question for ya. What kind of gas mileage do you get on the street? A friend of mine has an 11 second Mustang and gets 3 mpg. Please tell me you get a lot more than that...I'd like to give him some **** about it. Thanks.

 

a 9r is by no way comparable to a busa, yet a suzuki.
9r's are the tanks of real street bikes, good for cruising. Suzuki however is pure track bike, not comfy, too damn fast, too damn powerful, and will take every little bit when you poush em harder. The 1100 is badass but the busa is just a monster (although i think theyre ugly and too much)
But yeah, beating any bike over 750 is very impressive. Especially a gixxer

 

Just thought I would bring this thread back for all the new guys......you too can build an FD and go hunting 'busa's with some time, money, knowledge, motivation and (most of all) a healthy dose of insanity

 

Such a long time ago....good old memories...

 

Node, Newer 9r (1998 and up) will smoke a GSXR 1100 which hasn't been in the production for the last 5 or 6 years, the 9r's are only about 20-30 lbs heavier than a new gsxr 750, and they run 10 sec flat 1/4 mile stock, if you are talking about the suzuki Hayabusa that this post is all about, it's not a pure track bike by any means. And more of a touring bike. I had the pleasure of having both of the bikes on the track and belive me I'd take a 9r over a busa all day long. Your remark about the Suzuki is also wrong, the busa is one of the most comfortable sport bikes out there, that's why it weights about 100 more than the 9r. You need to get your facts straight. As far as beating a 750 in the type of race that these guys did 70-160, any new corvett, z28, modded fd and those type of cars will walk the GXSR 750 (really bad drag coeficient). This is from personal experience and math

 

why do threads like this always have to turn into flames and then people have to throw out numbers to prove their point?!?!?

PLUTO GOOD RUN, I BELIEVE YOU...i wish my car was built like you, actually, i wish i had my new motor, but still, thats freakin amazing! kudos

-eric

 

wow 30 psi
and i still have a n/a
ive got to shot myself
i need boost
awesome story

 

hrmm both those sites dont work... This new one isnt too shabby though dfwracer

 

my uncel took me for a ride on His Suzuki hiabusa, and crap, i think I am going to stick with cars,

this bike was FLYING, acceleration i've never felt before, as a passenger it was a little scary, being my second time ever on a bike, but ruding must be a dream, when and if he gets a new bike, i'll ask him about this, but **** u break a part, u gotta wait for Japan parts

 

WTF? Some of you are very creative with your science fiction.

Pluto is right about the acceleration of bikes.

Given:
Street bikes typically have ~100 -165 rwhp. RX-7s have 255 – insane rwhp.
Top speed is ONLY a function of horsepower and drag. Weight is not a factor.

We all know what HP is, but drag coefficient (CD A) is the, Friction Coefficient (think brake pads) x Frontal Area. The friction coefficient is slightly higher on the Busa+rider, BUT the fontal area is significantly less.

Busa - CD A of 3.37 ft2
RX-7 - CD A of 6.12 ft2

Hence, the RX-7 requires 2x more power to push through the air. Coincidently, this RX-7 has >2x the power; +400hp vs. 160 rwhp.

In acceleration the bike has an inertial advantage because it weighs less. It also has a drag advantage because it has a small frontal area. But wind is such a huge factor at high speed (exponential), the bike must use most of its power to fight the wind, while the car has power left to continue accelerating.


KneeDragonR1

 

High school physics, people. F=MA, or force equals the mass times acceleration. The car must use force to push air out of the way. A car reaches its top speed in one of two ways. It can be limited by gearing, or drag. With drag, when the car's power can't push the air out of the way it ceases to accelerate and goes at a constant speed. Good aerodynamics really help because they reduce the amount of force needed. High speeds require lots of force. Motorcycles don't have as much power and they have pretty poor aerodynamics, so their advantage is weight. At high speeds, weight becomes less of a factor because the amount of force needed increases drastically. If the car has enough power it will run even with or pass the bike.

 

Apples and Oranges.

If you want to compare the speed gain figures in the 2nd 1/8th, both vehicles must have the same entry speed.

Take one FD, make it run through the 1/8th at a roll on speed of 120 mph and see how fast it is after 1/8th of a mile and THEN your figure will make sense. Or make the busa get into the 2nd 1/8th at the same entry speed as the FD.

At your power point, I would believe the busa has still an edge but that is not relevant to the fact you won.

 

I believe it, but if that guy had the TRE mod, and the 1394 kit, you'd be toast.

 

I think you missed his point. His numbers say two things:

1. The 1st 1/8 mile the real factor is weight. The bike has the advantage.

2. The second 1/8 mile, wind is the big factor is wind. If it takes 50 hp to hold a vehicle at 100mph, it will take 200 hp to hold at 200mph.

3. Even though the bike has better aerodynamics and power to weight, it does not have the needed power to overcome the high speed wind.


KneeDragonR1

 

If you want to compare figures, you have to do it in a manner that makes sense. If the busa enters the 2nd 1/8th at say 110, it will gain more mph on the second 1/8th than if it had entered at 120.

I believe the car has a slight edge over the busa at those speeds, yet the comparison is flawed because we are not talking about the same figures.

Re-read my post, it is not about drag coeficient, it is about measurement comparison. And, yes I kown the effect of aerodynamics is not linear.

 

I don't believe it I agree with KneeDragon..!

 

Do Over: I understand your point. And you are correct to mention, ”the comparison is flawed because we are not talking about the same figures.” But if you remove all quantitative data and look at an acceleration graph of a car vs. bike irrespective of speed, but with respect to distance, the second half favors the car.

The relevance to us is this: If the car and bike are door to foot at the halfway point, the car is probably going to win. He was also refuting the naysayers. By starting at 70mph, he was essentially entering the second half tied with the bike. Although not even close to mathematically precise, he is pointing out the race started where the advantage car begins.

It is not precise, but it is accurate.

“yes… is not linear.” I figured YOU would know that, but there was too much BS about bikes having tractor-trailer aerodynamics.

KneeDragonR1

 

Damn It! It's the end of an era!

KneeDragonR1

 

On the general principle I agree (with similar 1/4 times, the trap speed on a car is higher). I am just **** retentive when it comes to figure comparison.

70 mph seems a bit low for the advantage to shift yet. On a busa, you are still potentially in first gear (from a stop that would be the case), basically trying not to roll the bike over (yes the gearing on a busa is super_tall). End of second gear would be more likely.

Does anybody know what the gearng is for the FD? I would say - relatively - short, but I am just guessing.

 

I just want to say I dont have sides either way, but want to share this experience with you.

i had a similar experience except that I had no idea I would be able to keep up with a bike at all. We were on the highway and I was in 3rd gear doing roughly 70mph (my car does 115mph in 3rd) and I was having fun with a moded "yoshi exhaust, re jetted carbs, head work" GSXR1100. He was in front of my car maybe two bike lengths in front and we both accelerated at the same time...........I ALMOST RAN OVER HIS BIKE, and had to swerve violently to avoid hitting him in the process I left two black marks with the rear tires spinning hard, I pulled 4th and kept on it and just Pulled away on the bike away "easily". I went to 150mph rev limit in 4th !

BTW I have 490rwhp (in dyno jet language) or 560odd BHP in a first gen RX7 weight is around 1150kg with driver. No NOS, street legal, Pump fuel, air filter, full exhaust....so far from a race car, the beauty of it is I dont get wet when it rains or "die" when I get hit by another car god forbid

 

Yup. I'm done with the bike thing. They don't call 'em organ donors on wheels fer nuthin....

 

The Busa was correct to be in 2nd from 70mph. 1st would just bring the front up. Plus it would not be long before he would hit the limiter.

The interesting part is ‘they were next to each other from 70 - 165 mph.’ If the car has a low speed advantage and the car a high speed one, why did they run even?


KneeDragonR1