On 6/10/2013 2:15 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:54:51 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote:

This is my idea of an F-150 and Porsche drivers feared me.

At least they would not cut me off ;-)

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Brownie.jpg

Those old pickups sure look puny compared to new models.
We saw an early Tundra (T 100 ??)yesterday and it doesn't look as capable as a new Tacoma.

The operative word here is "look".

That was a tough old truck.
A pallet of pavers, a pallet of sod, no matter, off it went.


I remember my dad's Ford had a straight 6. Wouldn't gain any speed going
up hill with a load, wouldn't lose any either...

On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 11:38:16 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Monday, June 10, 2013 8:40:05 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,

says...









With someone more skilled than I am driving it, my motorcycle will blow

the doors off that Ford truck in 0-60 and in the quarter mile and again,

with the right driver, leave that 911 Turbo you had behind, too.



But...not me with driving.



Only in a straight line. A car has more grip in the corners, and has the advantage on the track. You have to turn sooner or later.



Wait, are you saying that a car will out corner a motorcycle?

Yes!

Not true,

the reason being, you are right in thinking because of the amount of

tire contact a car has does give it a greater friction coefficient, you

also have mass to deal with, and simply physics will tell you that a

given mass wants to stay in a straight line, and that mass is MUCH

greater with a car. It's a centrifugal force thing! So, all in all, they

are closer to equal than anything. Motorcycle has less contact patch,

but also less mass.

There must be some reason that nearly every track record is held by a 4 wheeled vehicle. Much greater traction coupled with aerodynamic down force the bike doesn't have. Nah, you're probably right, they're equal.

A little bit of dampness and that motorcycle will slow down in a big hurry.

John H.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

On 6/10/13 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...




With someone more skilled than I am driving it, my motorcycle will blow
the doors off that Ford truck in 0-60 and in the quarter mile and again,
with the right driver, leave that 911 Turbo you had behind, too.

But...not me with driving.

Only in a straight line. A car has more grip in the corners, and has the advantage on the track. You have to turn sooner or later.

Wait, are you saying that a car will out corner a motorcycle? Not true,
the reason being, you are right in thinking because of the amount of
tire contact a car has does give it a greater friction coefficient, you
also have mass to deal with, and simply physics will tell you that a
given mass wants to stay in a straight line, and that mass is MUCH
greater with a car. It's a centrifugal force thing! So, all in all, they
are closer to equal than anything. Motorcycle has less contact patch,
but also less mass.


It depends on the track and the vehicles.

On a relatively simply track, like, for example, Daytona, certain
Italian motorcycles will blow the doors off your Ferraris, Porsches, and
Corvettes with similar top speeds because they will out-accelerate these
four wheeled vehicles, and braking isn't as severe as it would be on a
more difficult track with lots of complex, tight turns. On the more
severe tracks, the motorcycles cannot go as deep and as fast into the
tight turns as the cars, which have better brakes, so the cars can play
catchup. The bikes may still finish faster, but only because of their
acceleration abilities. This has been demonstrated many times with top
drivers in each category. It's the brakes.

On Monday, June 10, 2013 4:44:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 15:40:10 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute

wrote:



On 6/10/2013 2:15 PM, wrote:

On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:54:51 -0700 (PDT), True North

wrote:



This is my idea of an F-150 and Porsche drivers feared me.



At least they would not cut me off ;-)



http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Brownie.jpg



Those old pickups sure look puny compared to new models.

We saw an early Tundra (T 100 ??)yesterday and it doesn't look as capable as a new Tacoma.



The operative word here is "look".



That was a tough old truck.

A pallet of pavers, a pallet of sod, no matter, off it went.





I remember my dad's Ford had a straight 6. Wouldn't gain any speed going

up hill with a load, wouldn't lose any either...



That one had the 300CI 6 and it was plenty strong, even pulling my

boat.

It had the classic Florida Ford problem tho. They came standard with a

2 core radiator and in hot weather, towing, they ran hot. I put in a 3

core and the problem was fixed. I had to do the same thing with my

E150 van.

The 300 straight six was a torque monster. My dad had one in a 4x4, and in low range in 1st, you could let out the clutch and about walk beside it at idle. At that same idle, it would just about climb a tree. Great truck motor.

Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ...



With someone more skilled than I am driving it, my motorcycle will blow
the doors off that Ford truck in 0-60 and in the quarter mile and again,
with the right driver, leave that 911 Turbo you had behind, too. If I
recall the test data, the Duc will do 0=60 in 3.1 or 3.2 seconds, and
the quarter mile in 11.1 seconds. A couple of the Ducs will beat 3
seconds in 0-60 and do the quarter mile in under 10 seconds.

But...not me with driving.

---------------------------------------

Or me. I like bikes too ... or did. But at some point you have to
face the music and realize that reflexes aren't what they used to be
and motorcycles can be .... well ... flat out dangerous, even for
experienced riders. That, plus the fact that I got spoiled having
the Harley in Florida. I know I'll get all kinds of incoming flack
for this but cruising around in the early evening on some of the
inland roads near Jupiter in a tee shirt and no helmet was the balls.
Never went fast. Just nice, cruising on isolated back roads away
from all the noise and traffic. Compared to riding up here in MA
where you still have to have leathers on in the evenings, even in the
summer, helmet, gloves, chaps, .... the heck with it. Just wasn't the
same. Last Harley was a 2007 Ultra Classic. Beast weighed almost
900 lbs. Then, I traded a 1965 Volkswagon Bus that I picked up for a
completely restored 1974 Norton 850 Commando.
Pretty stupid move. The Norton was a young man's bike, not something
for an old fart like me. Reliving my youth, or tried to. Rode it
twice and sold it.



Harry's imaginary Ducati is far more unreliable than either of your
M5's. I know several people who have owned one, and only one, and now
have another brand.

"Earl" wrote in message
...

Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...



With someone more skilled than I am driving it, my motorcycle will
blow
the doors off that Ford truck in 0-60 and in the quarter mile and
again,
with the right driver, leave that 911 Turbo you had behind, too. If
I
recall the test data, the Duc will do 0=60 in 3.1 or 3.2 seconds,
and
the quarter mile in 11.1 seconds. A couple of the Ducs will beat 3
seconds in 0-60 and do the quarter mile in under 10 seconds.

But...not me with driving.

---------------------------------------

Or me. I like bikes too ... or did. But at some point you have
to face the music and realize that reflexes aren't what they used to
be and motorcycles can be .... well ... flat out dangerous, even for
experienced riders. That, plus the fact that I got spoiled having
the Harley in Florida. I know I'll get all kinds of incoming flack
for this but cruising around in the early evening on some of the
inland roads near Jupiter in a tee shirt and no helmet was the
balls.
Never went fast. Just nice, cruising on isolated back roads away
from all the noise and traffic. Compared to riding up here in MA
where you still have to have leathers on in the evenings, even in
the summer, helmet, gloves, chaps, .... the heck with it. Just
wasn't the same. Last Harley was a 2007 Ultra Classic. Beast
weighed almost 900 lbs. Then, I traded a 1965 Volkswagon Bus that
I picked up for a completely restored 1974 Norton 850 Commando.
Pretty stupid move. The Norton was a young man's bike, not
something for an old fart like me. Reliving my youth, or tried to.
Rode it twice and sold it.



Harry's imaginary Ducati is far more unreliable than either of your
M5's. I know several people who have owned one, and only one, and now
have another brand.

------------------------------------------

That's hard to believe. The two M5's I had were nightmares. They
were 2006 models and I think BMW was still getting all the bugs out of
the software that controlled virtually every aspect of the car. The
first one was constantly locking up the transmission so you couldn't
shift it. Software revisions and upgrades didn't fix it. They
finally gave me a newer one, manufactured later in the year that
supposedly had all the "bugs" worked out. Nope. Started doing the
same thing. Red cog of death appeared on the dash display. I had
enough. They are awesome cars and maybe all the bugs are worked out
by now, but it turned me off to BMW performance vehicles.

On 6/10/2013 7:37 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"Earl" wrote in message
...

Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ...



With someone more skilled than I am driving it, my motorcycle will blow
the doors off that Ford truck in 0-60 and in the quarter mile and again,
with the right driver, leave that 911 Turbo you had behind, too. If I
recall the test data, the Duc will do 0=60 in 3.1 or 3.2 seconds, and
the quarter mile in 11.1 seconds. A couple of the Ducs will beat 3
seconds in 0-60 and do the quarter mile in under 10 seconds.

But...not me with driving.

---------------------------------------

Or me. I like bikes too ... or did. But at some point you have to
face the music and realize that reflexes aren't what they used to be
and motorcycles can be .... well ... flat out dangerous, even for
experienced riders. That, plus the fact that I got spoiled having
the Harley in Florida. I know I'll get all kinds of incoming flack
for this but cruising around in the early evening on some of the
inland roads near Jupiter in a tee shirt and no helmet was the balls.
Never went fast. Just nice, cruising on isolated back roads away
from all the noise and traffic. Compared to riding up here in MA
where you still have to have leathers on in the evenings, even in the
summer, helmet, gloves, chaps, .... the heck with it. Just wasn't the
same. Last Harley was a 2007 Ultra Classic. Beast weighed almost
900 lbs. Then, I traded a 1965 Volkswagon Bus that I picked up for a
completely restored 1974 Norton 850 Commando.
Pretty stupid move. The Norton was a young man's bike, not something
for an old fart like me. Reliving my youth, or tried to. Rode it
twice and sold it.



Harry's imaginary Ducati is far more unreliable than either of your
M5's. I know several people who have owned one, and only one, and now
have another brand.

------------------------------------------

That's hard to believe. The two M5's I had were nightmares. They were
2006 models and I think BMW was still getting all the bugs out of the
software that controlled virtually every aspect of the car. The first
one was constantly locking up the transmission so you couldn't shift
it. Software revisions and upgrades didn't fix it. They finally gave
me a newer one, manufactured later in the year that supposedly had all
the "bugs" worked out. Nope. Started doing the same thing. Red cog
of death appeared on the dash display. I had enough. They are awesome
cars and maybe all the bugs are worked out by now, but it turned me off
to BMW performance vehicles.


I have a buddy who has a more recent M5. I haven't heard him complaining
about it.

On 6/10/13 7:37 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"Earl" wrote in message
...

Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message ...



With someone more skilled than I am driving it, my motorcycle will blow
the doors off that Ford truck in 0-60 and in the quarter mile and again,
with the right driver, leave that 911 Turbo you had behind, too. If I
recall the test data, the Duc will do 0=60 in 3.1 or 3.2 seconds, and
the quarter mile in 11.1 seconds. A couple of the Ducs will beat 3
seconds in 0-60 and do the quarter mile in under 10 seconds.

But...not me with driving.

---------------------------------------

Or me. I like bikes too ... or did. But at some point you have to
face the music and realize that reflexes aren't what they used to be
and motorcycles can be .... well ... flat out dangerous, even for
experienced riders. That, plus the fact that I got spoiled having
the Harley in Florida. I know I'll get all kinds of incoming flack
for this but cruising around in the early evening on some of the
inland roads near Jupiter in a tee shirt and no helmet was the balls.
Never went fast. Just nice, cruising on isolated back roads away
from all the noise and traffic. Compared to riding up here in MA
where you still have to have leathers on in the evenings, even in the
summer, helmet, gloves, chaps, .... the heck with it. Just wasn't the
same. Last Harley was a 2007 Ultra Classic. Beast weighed almost
900 lbs. Then, I traded a 1965 Volkswagon Bus that I picked up for a
completely restored 1974 Norton 850 Commando.
Pretty stupid move. The Norton was a young man's bike, not something
for an old fart like me. Reliving my youth, or tried to. Rode it
twice and sold it.



Harry's imaginary Ducati is far more unreliable than either of your
M5's. I know several people who have owned one, and only one, and now
have another brand.

------------------------------------------

That's hard to believe. The two M5's I had were nightmares. They were
2006 models and I think BMW was still getting all the bugs out of the
software that controlled virtually every aspect of the car. The first
one was constantly locking up the transmission so you couldn't shift
it. Software revisions and upgrades didn't fix it. They finally gave
me a newer one, manufactured later in the year that supposedly had all
the "bugs" worked out. Nope. Started doing the same thing. Red cog
of death appeared on the dash display. I had enough. They are awesome
cars and maybe all the bugs are worked out by now, but it turned me off
to BMW performance vehicles.


It wouldn't matter what brand I had, "Earl the Flaming Ass" would knock
it. That's why I don't post photos here any more of boats, motorcycles
or cars, and one of the reasons why Earl is a permanent resident of my
Bozo Bin.

Ducati produces beautifully made motorcycles that are super fast, handle
well, and are reliable. I've had Honda and Kawasaki motorcycles and have
found their reliability no different than "The Duc."

In article , says...

"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 6/10/13 9:51 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 6/10/13 8:28 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..


The F-150 Lightening was a Porsche killer.

---------------------------------------------

You're dreaming. The last year Ford built the Lightning, it had
impressive performance numbers in the quarter mile, but that's
not
what a Porsche is all about. But, for the record:

2001 Ford F-150 Lightning 0-60 mph 5.1 Quarter mile 13.7
2001 Porsche 911 Turbo 0-60 mph 3.8 Quarter mile 12.1

Now, take them off the track and onto the streets and there's no
contest at all. The Porsche will surefoot around corners and
bends in
the road that would cause the Lightning to climb up a tree.

I had a 2001 Porsche 911 Twin Turbo. Finest engineered car I've
ever
driven, and I've had a few.

Load the Porsche full of gravel and go up a steep dirt road and
see
which one prevails!



No one would load either vehicle up with gravel. The Lightning was
a
pick-me-up truck in name only, far too fancy for the workaday
world. I
took a Lightning out for a demo when I decided to trade in my
SplashTruck. In those days, it didn't even have the tow capacity of
the
"regular" F150, which is what I ended up getting. Oh, and if memory
serves, the Lighting had much lower ground clearance than the
regular
F150, too. Loaded with gravel and going up a steep bumpy dirt road
would
have been death for that truck.

Not true at all, the Lighting was a damned good combo work/play
truck,
and the "ground clearance" was not much different than any F-150. It
was
lowered only one inch from a base 150. Towing is about the same as
the
base 150 as well.


Since you have no idea what F150 I bought and probably not the model
year, either, your claims are not applicable. When I was shopping for
a
new "full size" pickup, the Lightning did not match up to the towing
or
height specifications of the F150 I bought. Period.

----------------------------------

Some of my replies have been in error. Indeed, the Lightning *does*
have a towing capacity of 5,000 lbs although I remember when the
supercharged version first came out it was not recommended.

There have been three generations of it. The original was not
supercharged. It had the 351W "truck" engine that was highly
modified.
The supercharged 5.8L versions came later. But, going back to the
original issue, you simply can't compare a pickup truck regardless of
how "fast" it is with a high performance sports car like a Porsche
911. Two completely different animals. My point about the Porsche
is that it's not simply designed to go fast. It also is designed to
stop and handle in world class competition. The Lightning is a
unique, fun truck but it's not in the same league from a standpoint of
total performance.

The F-150 Lightening in its latest generation had a supercharged 5.4L V8 putting out 360/380
HP.

In article , says...

On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:23:49 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, iBoaterer wrote:


Sorry, I have no interest in getting into anything like a
Greg-Iboaterererer 300-post debate that never reaches a conclusion.

Right.......


Right. Absolutely right. Perhaps you can intrigue Greg with this
discussion and get back to me a few hundred posts later.

No dog in this fight
This is my idea of an F-150 and Porsche drivers feared me.

At least they would not cut me off ;-)

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Brownie.jpg

Nice looking 20+ year old truck.