How The Speeds Differ
Going fast is a simple equation of power, weight, aerodynamics and traction. By nature, motorcycles are much lighter than cars and thus need less power to go fast. However, bikes are also less aerodynamic and produce less power from their smaller engines. In other words, a bike's strongest asset is its lack of weight.
On the other hand big, heavy cars use their bigger, more powerful engine, better traction and superior aerodynamics to their advantage.
A good analogy would be two balls at the top of an incline, one heavy and one light. The lighter ball will obviously get going much faster than the heavier one, but once the heavy ball is rolling it has the power to catch the smaller one. Lightweight motorcycles tend to be better sprinters, where heavier, more powerful cars tend to be the best high-speed haulers.
How Would You Fare?
In essence, you can tell a lot about the speed of a vehicle by its quarter-mile performance. Generally, the elapsed time (ET) is a reflection of traction and weight, while the trap speed is more of an indication of power.
If Bike A runs the quarter-mile in 9.0 @ 130 mph and Bike B does it in 10.0 @ 160 mph, which is faster? Well, Bike A had a better ET since it got there in nine seconds, which means it won the sprint likely because it was lighter and had better traction.
Even though Bike B got beat by one second to the finish line, when it got there it was traveling at 160 mph-30 mph faster. This means that it got a slower start but once it got the ball rolling it had more power (or force behind it) and it was catching up, fast.
Given more time, Bike B (the more powerful ball, remember the analogy) will catch and pass Bike A, the smaller, lighter bike.
To see how your bike stacks up against these cars, compare your ETs and traps and see if you've got enough. You may have a better ET but at a lesser speed, which means in the long run (above 120 mph) they'll catch you.
Time To Speed: 60-120 MPH Roll Race
2000 Acura Integra: 536 HP:...
2000 Acura Integra: 536 HP: 9.3 sec
ZX-14: 4.4 sec
2000 Chevrolet Camaro SS 530...
2000 Chevrolet Camaro SS 530 HP: 8.2s sec
ZX-14: 4.4 sec
2003 Ford Mustang Cobra 615...
2003 Ford Mustang Cobra 615 HP: 7.1 sec
ZX-14: 4.4 sec
2001 Chevrolet Corvette Z06...
2001 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 675 HP: 5.3 sec
ZX-14: 4.4 sec
1998 Dodge Viper: 950 HP:...
1998 Dodge Viper: 950 HP: 5.1 sec
ZX-14: 4.4sec
To ensure accuracy we used...
To ensure accuracy we used a Racelogic Driftbox. The GPS Datalogging device was easy to use and dead accurate.
Shit Happens
Unfortunately after just one pull the Viper went home on a flatbed. Things break when you've got nearly 1000 HP and the transmission took the hit that day.
Pay-Up
The bike prevailed, just as we'd thought. Despite an opposition of nearly 3000 HP, the almighty ZX-14 showed the four-wheelers nothing but taillight. Under different circumstances perhaps the Viper or 'Vette might have bettered the big Kawi, but then again, this was "run what you brung, no excuses."
While it's possible to build a car that can beat a bike, it certainly takes more than a buck. Our stock ZX-14 cost a tick over $12,000, while the Viper has nearly $50,000 in addition to the cost of the car, yet still didn't beat the Kawi. In the battle for supremacy you can't beat a bike's bang for the buck.