...having read some but not all of these posts, many of which are interesting and relevant, and having ridden sportbikes off and on for the past 20 years, I have to say that there's still little point in having a superbike shootout without posting laptimes. For several reasons. One we need an objective reference. Otherwise it's just one persons opinion vs another and it all comes down to the credibility of the person issuing the opinion. Which is what really makes me wonder why so many of the testers think that the CBR handles well yet it's the one bike that went down. This really concerns me. Second as others have posted, these are ultrafast bikes that have little real use on the street, in terms of their potential, meaning that much less powerful and much cheaper bikes are very relevant to this comparison. So why don't we at least see how these bikes are so much better than slower, cheaper bikes. Third, just how much does the weight and newer technology, stiffer/better frames and components matter? This is a good way to keep a relation to *older* bikes, which is a good indication of how or why these bikes will justify their higher cost and how well they will keep their resale value. And I think this is one of the MAIN reasons why laptimes aren't posted here.
The fact is that there are always reasons to do things just like there are reasons to not do them. You could have 10 reasons one way and just one the other way. Someone has to make a value decision but that doesn't change the fact that there will be good reasons to do it and things that will not be realized by not doing it. Same the other way. We can only ask that you and your staff consider the value of what is asked for in the comments section and not just dismiss those concerns, either rationally or irrationally. Find a good solution. There's nothing wrong with posting lap times with caveats, we're quite capable of understanding why they can vary, why they would vary. And anyone who takes them literally deserves what they get in response.
I for one would love to see how bikes in each category compare to bikes in the other category in terms of lap times and also I really am interested in why these bikes go down in the hands of competent, experienced riders, since the point of riding is to *not* crash. No one is going to get on a bike thinking that they are going to crash and if you guys can't keep these bikes up (or are not interested in keeping these bikes up) I really want to know why.
Other than that, thanks for the article. It's a good read in and of itself. Could have been more but still it's good. And I also enjoy all the comments.
The fact is that there are always reasons to do things just like there are reasons to not do them. You could have 10 reasons one way and just one the other way. Someone has to make a value decision but that doesn't change the fact that there will be good reasons to do it and things that will not be realized by not doing it. Same the other way. We can only ask that you and your staff consider the value of what is asked for in the comments section and not just dismiss those concerns, either rationally or irrationally. Find a good solution. There's nothing wrong with posting lap times with caveats, we're quite capable of understanding why they can vary, why they would vary. And anyone who takes them literally deserves what they get in response.
I for one would love to see how bikes in each category compare to bikes in the other category in terms of lap times and also I really am interested in why these bikes go down in the hands of competent, experienced riders, since the point of riding is to *not* crash. No one is going to get on a bike thinking that they are going to crash and if you guys can't keep these bikes up (or are not interested in keeping these bikes up) I really want to know why.
Other than that, thanks for the article. It's a good read in and of itself. Could have been more but still it's good. And I also enjoy all the comments.