:slap:

 

HOLY SHIT!!!! STOP THE PRESSES!!!! ARE YOU SAYING A MOTORCYCLE IS FASTER THAN A CAR!!!!???? LET ME PICK MYSELF OFF THE FLOOR BECAUSE I'M COMPLETELY BLOWN AWAY!!


A movie called Torque should be about Muscle Cars and nothing else.

 

or submarines.

 

No that movie would be called The Hunt For Red October, or whatever that Harrison Ford piece of crap was about the Russian sub.

 

I figured it would be a news flash or you

I agree on the muscle car comment though.

 

...or a movie about physics h: :chuckles:

 

I was making fun of no torque Hondas in the first place anyway. Not making fun of motorcycles really. Whats sadder, a bike with 80ft-lbs of torque or a car. I'm sure you can see where I'm going with that.

 

Thats called Revenge of the Nerds.

 

if you wanna get anal about it, torque is really meaningless unless you factor in the hp/weight ratio.

a vehicle can have a real high amout of torque, but if it is heavy as a mofo it won't be worth a damn in the real world.

the latest motorcyclist magazine lists my cbr954rr as 370 lbs dry weight & 154 hp @ the crank. it's 439 lbs w/ fuel & fluids, 132.1 hp @11250 rpm & 68.4 ft/lbs @ 8750 rpm which i would assume is @ the rear wheel. it also states the 1/4 mile is 10.2 @ 139 mph.

that's not too shabby no matter what your point of reference is. there are only two 2003 model bikes that have higher hp/torque/qtr miles times than mine......gsxr1000 & a hyabussa - both of which mine can hang w/ unless you are right on the razor's edge.

yes it has only 68 ft/lbs of torque, but @ ~600 lbs w/ me on it, it'll pull harder @ 100 mph than most any car on here. https://www.honda-acura.net/forums/s...hreadid=103691

massive amounts of hp or torque either one as meaningless if the vehicle weighs alot. i believe that was John's original point.

 

why was the link deleted? i stated it was NWS. i was under the impression that we could link to those type pics that couldn't be posted.

just curious