What defines a fast car in 2020?

On our local country roads , I'd go with the ferraris suspension wear & tear, and even it's compliancy/setup/clearance as the dissuasive factors.
 
Demon said:
I think your definitions are just way off and no doubt everyone is thinking you are being exceedingly blasé.

If you keep moving the goal posts this quickly, cars that where 2.9 seconds are now apparently 'brisk' to you and you need to be sub 2.5 to be 'fast'.. Whilst cars have generally got faster over the years, it's a much slower evolution so 'most' as in the majority of people (i.e. joe public) will have normal expectations:

If you picked random average people and chucked them in a range of cars with different performance levels, I bet if all you had where 0-60 runs:
0-60 in 7-8 Seconds people would think are fast/very brisk
0-60 in 6-7 Seconds people would think are very fast
0-60 in 5-6 Seconds people would think are crazy fast
0-60 in 4-5 Seconds people would think are too fast
0-60 in 3-4 Second people would think are insanely fast
0-60 in <3 Seconds people would think are mind bendingly fast.

However, as many people are pointing out, 0-60 does not remotely cover a fraction of the parameters that people attribute to performance;
My first car (An 1100 Mini Clubman with uprated suspension and few engine tweaks) used to scare the living daylights out of people through twisty roads and almost exclusively people use to say that thing was 'insanely fast'.. yet it struggled to do 0-60 in under 9 seconds..

Saying all that, I'm terrible and exclusively I just always want more power.. I find my E46 M3 'adequate' and wished it had 550BHP, although I'd get used to that and no doubt want more..

But then if you want to get super relative, then I don't think anything you are talking about is anything other than brisk..

Back in 2003 I had a vehicle that did 0-60 in 2.5-3s, 0-100 in sub 6s and that was stock, cost £5K second hand (it was 3 months old, new ones where £8k).. that was a GSXR1000 and yes, initially I struggled to open it fully in anything other than 3rd, but by the time I sold it I could have done with more power..

Now bikes with rider have approx 700BHP/ton, they still obliterate 99.99% of cars in a straight line.. They struggle 0-60 due to the laws of physics and getting that energy through a tiny single contact patch but in terms of usability on the road in any situation, they are far far far better.

My only real point in all that is that having just 'brisk' and 'fast' and no context of the observer at all is so pointless...
Click to expand...
Am I right in thinking that bikes can't corner as fast as cars though?
 
Squidward said:
.... Most cars on the road today are capable of running 0 to 60 in less than 4 seconds, and 0 to 100 in less than 10 seconds with ease.

I personally classify a car as "fast" if it meets the below criteria:
0 to 60mph in 2.9s or less
0 to 100 in 6.5s or less

Any thing slower than the above times I would class as "brisk" rather than fast.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

In 2019 there were around 33 million licensed cars on the UK roads according to statista.com
I would estimate that of those 33 million cars, an extremely low percentage were capable of under 4 seconds to 60. At a guess I would say well under 1% (330,000 cars).
 
theone8181 said:
Am I right in thinking that bikes can't corner as fast as cars though?
Click to expand...

Depends on situation, like SkodaMart the acceleration outstrips pretty much everything, especially once 'rolling' so out of corners is a good example.

But on the roads some of the limitations are mitigated by size, if you've got a single lane in a car you have limited scope to 'open the corner' by taking a line from outside -> apex -> outside again, but a bike on the same bit of road has far most scope to open the corner making up for some of the difference, imo.
 
Nasher said:
4 wheels does help in corners :p

I don't think you can whip them around tight bends like a light sports car.
Click to expand...

4 wheels > 2 wheels, but it has to be a pretty decent sports car to beat a sports bike on corners.
The biggest issue being the cahoonas (and skill - bikes literally cheat physics when ridden professionally) required on a bike.

Get it wrong and you’re probably dead too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I followed a Moto GP rider for a bit around the Ring, it was a thing of incredible beauty to behold, just incredible skill levels and commitment. Back at the pits he was surrounded by the bikers there. I don't know who he was but recognised his face from telly. The 'bit' for which I followed him was probably 6 or 7 bends. Impressive to see how the weight transfer worked. Magnificent stuff and amazing commitment and confidence.
 
Housey said:
I followed a Moto GP rider for a bit around the Ring, it was a thing of incredible beauty to behold, just incredible skill levels and commitment. Back at the pits he was surrounded by the bikers there. I don't know who he was but recognised his face from telly. The 'bit' for which I followed him was probably 6 or 7 bends. Impressive to see how the weight transfer worked. Magnificent stuff and amazing commitment and confidence.
Click to expand...

A well ridden bike is really something to behold. I just can’t begin to fathom the level of skill needed, never mind the bravery, confidence and huge testicles to do it.

I’m still fascinated by a clip of a Rossi* on the road with a pillion. The guy filming is a proper *******, his videos are awful, but he is fast by all accounts. He overtakes Rossi who is two up with a bird. Rossi then proceeds to show him how to really ride a bike through the mountain roads while his trusting Mrs tucks in and hangs on for dear life :cry:

So much about riding a motorcycle is about the rider, there’s always someone quicker on a slower bike


*probably not Rossi

Edit: how is the end of a bell starred out! :D
 
I enjoy riding a motorbike more than driving a car, but I would be more confident driving a car fast (done a couple of track days - I’m no expert at either).
If anything learning to ride a bike has slowed me down, makes you realise how vulnerable you are (even with a steel box around you).
I am in total respect and awe of the MotoGP lads but the roads not the place IMO.
Natural selection seems to catch up with you rather quickly on a bike.
 
R.P.L said:
I doubt that's true :p

I've toyed with the idea of getting a bike (after getting a licence of course) a few times, and it might still happen. I can easily imagine ending up killing myself on it, but hey ho :D
Click to expand...

Me too, but everyone I know who rides them has spent some time in hospital after falling off one.
 
SkodaMart said:
Everyone you know? That’s some bad luck.

(either that or you only know a couple of people who ride).
Click to expand...
I agree, there's a guy I work with who went headfirst into a signpost. I think part of it is that he's in his late 40s and he had a bike in his 20s and didn't realise how much faster they are now, quite common I believe.
 
theone8181 said:
I agree, there's a guy I work with who went headfirst into a signpost. I think part of it is that he's in his late 40s and he had a bike in his 20s and didn't realise how much faster they are now, quite common I believe.
Click to expand...

Its totally unforgiving, punishes mistakes hard. Wrong vehicle to buy if your looking for thrills IMO. If you buy a bike to ride fast you are probably going to come unstuck sooner or later.
Motorcycles are about simplicity freedom, and total involvement.
Don’t see that many sports bikes around these days, the majority seem to be adventure bikes or modern classics.
Those who ride know the risks.
 
jaybee said:
In 2019 there were around 33 million licensed cars on the UK roads according to statista.com
I would estimate that of those 33 million cars, an extremely low percentage were capable of under 4 seconds to 60. At a guess I would say well under 1% (330,000 cars).
Click to expand...

It's a matter of context...I think many cars could do 0-60 in under 4 seconds if pushed off a high enough cliff :)

As for the original question, I think there isn't a simple answer. What's being measured? 0-60 times? 1/4 mile times? 30-70 times? Lap times? Top speed? Measured against what? The average today and if so the average for what kind of car? Some arbitrary number? Or subjective assessment? The vehicle I've been in that seemed the fastest was a kart with a motorbike engine. Was it objectively fast? Not really, although the acceleration was potent if you had traction. But driving it was visceral and it seemed like extraordinary speed.
 
SkodaMart said:
Everyone you know? That’s some bad luck.

(either that or you only know a couple of people who ride).
Click to expand...

I know far too many who've had a spell in hospital or killed themselves biking :( most of them doing silly speeds though. For instance one of my group of friends at school hit a tree at an estimated 109MPH and instantly killed.

My brother had a pretty close call - but he'd invested in a jacket with that back armour thingy a few days before and almost certainly meant the difference between walking away with a few bruises and paralysis or possible death (apparently a YZF 125 stock tyres are lethal in the wet if someone pulls out on you).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom