N201MKTurbo Posted September 7 Report Posted September 7 On 7/14/2022 at 5:36 PM, A64Pilot said: US cars became crap in the mid 70’s. In 1978 the quickest US production vehicle was a Dodge little red express truck, why? because it was over the weight limit and was exempted from a lot of the pollution controls. 1976 Vette was 180 HP. 14 sec 1/4 miles were real fast. Most “fast” cars ran like 16’s. My 1977 Kawasaki KZ1000 with headers and cams did a 9.2 1/4 mile. So, you could get a fast vehicle back then.
Hank Posted September 7 Report Posted September 7 3 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said: My 1977 Kawasaki KZ1000 with headers and cams did a 9.2 1/4 mile. So, you could get a fast vehicle back then. Motorcycles are always faster than cars. Do the math--pounds per hp favor not having heavy sheet metal and glass. 1
jetdriven Posted September 7 Report Posted September 7 1 hour ago, N201MKTurbo said: My 1977 Kawasaki KZ1000 with headers and cams did a 9.2 1/4 mile. So, you could get a fast vehicle back then. Thats astounding, the KZ1000 had a reputation as a death machine, like the Porsche 930 Turbo, back in the day.
N201MKTurbo Posted September 7 Report Posted September 7 1 hour ago, jetdriven said: Thats astounding, the KZ1000 had a reputation as a death machine, like the Porsche 930 Turbo, back in the day. Full disclosure, my engine turned that time. I wrecked the bike and some bikers down the street who watched me tune the thing all the time bought the wreck and put the engine on a drag bike. They did the 9.2 on the drag bike. The most bizarre thing that happened with that bike happened one night at about 2:00 AM. I was assistant manager at a pizza parlor and had to close the place, so I didn’t get out till then. I pulled up to this stop light and a police bike pulled up in the lane next to me. When the light turned green, we both took off an a normal speed, then the cop bike sped up a bit, so I did too, then the cop nailed it and so did I. I pulled well ahead of him. We hit about 140. At the next light we were once again in adjacent lanes. I didn’t look at him and he didn’t look at me. When the light turned green I took off at a normal speed and he turned right. 1 1
kortopates Posted September 7 Report Posted September 7 Yes, they are both Butyl. But the quality is no where the same. The Desser (LeakGuard) are crap and they fail on the manufacturing molding lines. No amount of talc will save them from chaffing. So while the LeagGuards don’t leak (as their name implies) they do just pop out of the blue. Michelin Air Stops will never do that if air pressure is kept in a reasonable range, just like any inner tube. Final analysis is the cost difference for Michelin tubes is totally worth it.So a few people say, but i’ve never had a flat in over 20+ years of using them. Can’t help but suspect some of these reported flats are pinch flats. But what do i know since never had a flat.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 3
N201MKTurbo Posted September 7 Report Posted September 7 The biggest problem with tubes, is they get bigger over time. I’m not sure how that happens, probably the rubber cold flowing under pressure. When they get too big, it is difficult to get them in and laying flat. They will get creases and folds in them and that is where they fail. If you use a new tube every time you put on a new tire you won’t have this issue. 2
Pinecone Posted September 8 Report Posted September 8 On 7/14/2022 at 8:36 PM, A64Pilot said: US cars became crap in the mid 70’s. In 1978 the quickest US production vehicle was a Dodge little red express truck, why? because it was over the weight limit and was exempted from a lot of the pollution controls. 1976 Vette was 180 HP. 14 sec 1/4 miles were real fast. Most “fast” cars ran like 16’s. On 7/21/2022 at 6:46 PM, Fly Boomer said: '67 was 435 HP Different HP ratings. In the 60s up to 1972, HP was SAE Gross HP. That is without an exhaust system, headers, not driving any accessories (including not running the water pump), no air filter. Then they changed to SAE Net HP. Which was the engine as installed in the car. With full exhaust system and air intake with air filter and all accessories. In the late 70s and through the 80s, the HP numbers fell even more due to meeting emissions targets with the technology at the time. There is also the factor that most companies report the highest HP they recorded for any engine they tested. And they did not test most of the production engines. And, in some cases, the changed the specs in a way that lowered the HP without changing the reported output. My 85 Dodge Daytona Turbo Z was reported at 148 HP. But talking to the engine shop that did mine (and specialized in Chrysler engines) stated that every engine they had seen, the compression was about 1/2 point lower than what Dodge said it was. So it seems they lowered the CR for engine safety, but did not change the specs.
Pinecone Posted September 8 Report Posted September 8 22 hours ago, jetdriven said: Thats astounding, the KZ1000 had a reputation as a death machine, like the Porsche 930 Turbo, back in the day. Porsches had a bad rep way before the turbos. Trailing throttle oversteer. The turbo just gave you the additional option of spinning the car using power.
Pinecone Posted September 8 Report Posted September 8 23 hours ago, Hank said: Motorcycles are always faster than cars. Do the math--pounds per hp favor not having heavy sheet metal and glass. In a straight line. 2
jetdriven Posted September 8 Report Posted September 8 19 hours ago, kortopates said: So a few people say, but i’ve never had a flat in over 20+ years of using them. Can’t help but suspect some of these reported flats are pinch flats. But what do i know since never had a flat. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I put two desser retreads and two desser tubes on our plane a few years ago, one was flat when we let it off the jacks the next day, we took it off, and I was seeping out of one of those mold line seams. They sent me another one, I put that in. The other one, a year later, failed when I took a customer over to Dugosh to pick up his plane. I literally landed, after a half hour, I taxied over to the fuel pump, and it was flat when I got out of the plane. I haven't used one since.
Nico1 Posted September 8 Report Posted September 8 A question related to the OP: How long can you 'store' a new tube? Have had one on the shelf for over 3 years...
N201MKTurbo Posted September 8 Report Posted September 8 10 minutes ago, Nico1 said: A question related to the OP: How long can you 'store' a new tube? Have had one on the shelf for over 3 years... Good question, I have on on the wheel for over 10 years. If it is out of the sun and not exposed to anything that will degrade it, it should last a long time. 1
Fly Boomer Posted September 8 Report Posted September 8 31 minutes ago, Pinecone said: In a straight line. But, as a trooper once taught me, "You can't outrun a Motorola".
N201MKTurbo Posted September 8 Report Posted September 8 39 minutes ago, Pinecone said: In a straight line. I don't think there is any car that can outrun a skilled rider on a fast bike. 1
Fly Boomer Posted September 8 Report Posted September 8 2 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said: I don't think there is any car that can outrun a skilled rider on a fast bike. I think it depends on the road. Cars can corner in ways not possible for a bike.
N201MKTurbo Posted September 8 Report Posted September 8 11 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said: I think it depends on the road. Cars can corner in ways not possible for a bike. You know we are just having a pissing contest. There is no way to prove this. If I had my current bike 40 years ago, I would challenge you to a race through a city. But I'm too old and wise for that foolishness these days.
Pinecone Posted September 9 Report Posted September 9 21 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said: I don't think there is any car that can outrun a skilled rider on a fast bike. Cars corner much better. And brake better. And assuming equally skilled driver.
N201MKTurbo Posted September 9 Report Posted September 9 34 minutes ago, Pinecone said: Cars corner much better. And brake better. And assuming equally skilled driver. You must not have a lot of time on bikes. 1
EricJ Posted September 9 Report Posted September 9 3 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said: You must not have a lot of time on bikes. He's right for racing. Bikes generally don't have enough tire contact patch or downforce to corner or brake as well as a decent race car. 2
Jackk Posted September 9 Report Posted September 9 On 9/8/2025 at 7:03 AM, Fly Boomer said: But, as a trooper once taught me, "You can't outrun a Motorola". Sure you can Calling for help that isn’t there isn’t very useful, nor is asking someone to chase something you lost sight of. Think post 1990s we have falsely elevated the goverment to this hero/god like status, it’s kinda funny
Bolter Posted September 9 Report Posted September 9 5 hours ago, Pinecone said: Cars corner much better. And brake better. And assuming equally skilled driver. I think this is true only at the F1 level with a skilled driver where serious downforce aerodynamics permit going well past 1g in cornering. As a rank amateur motorcyclist doing track days, I would get 1g turns (45° lean) with an old entry level 600 sport bike without mods and few cars can do that. The skilled riders are leaning much more in racing. I found a video for straight line drags, where the motorcycle beat 2000 HP EV, F1 car, and rally car. 1 1
M20F Posted September 9 Report Posted September 9 On 9/7/2025 at 9:23 AM, N201MKTurbo said: My 1977 Kawasaki KZ1000 with headers and cams did a 9.2 1/4 mile. So, you could get a fast vehicle back then. My 1987 FZR1000 which was a monster and it was 11.2 with a pro driving, I was a good second slower. The Ducati Panigale is low 9’s. What were you running to get 9.2 for a 77?
N201MKTurbo Posted September 9 Report Posted September 9 It is hard to beat the laws of physics. Power to weight ratio and low aerodynamic drag favors the bike. Same with braking, Less mass to slow down. Most bikes have crazy huge brakes too. My bike has 3 12" brake disks for two wheels. It stops crazy fast. 2
N201MKTurbo Posted September 9 Report Posted September 9 26 minutes ago, M20F said: My 1987 FZR1000 which was a monster and it was 11.2 with a pro driving, I was a good second slower. The Ducati Panigale is low 9’s. What were you running to get 9.2 for a 77? Cams, headers and pistons. As I said above, the engine was put on a drag bike and driven by a pro. It had a huge tire and a wheelie bar. Oh, I did polish the pistons, chambers and ports. I didn't put it on a flow bench because I was poor and didn't have one. I just made them look shiny. I did have time and elbow grease. This was 45 years ago after all.
Recommended Posts