THis thread is getting too long
Let's agree to disagree.
I'm really only arguing with you for the sake of debate. You are right, peak torque values don't neccesarily reflect directly on performance. A Cummins Diesel may produce 500 foot pounds of torque at 1500RpM (or whatever) but that doesn't make that truck the fastest accelerating vehicle. The only way you could make a high-torque/low rpm engined vehicle accelerate quickly would be if you were able to rapidly decrease the gear reduction factor while the engine maintained its speed. (ie with a CVT). But we don't have a transmission that can withstand those stresses.
Still, what I am saying, is that a motor like the V2K's, with a massive low-rpm torque peak, offers useable performance without wringing it out. Sure, you could have a six cylinder 250cc engine turning 24000 RPM which TECHNICALLY transfers more torque to the pavement but that torque isn't as ACCESSIBLE. I have dragraced and beat 600cc supersport motorcycles with my heavier and less powerful VFR, but it takes a more skillfull rider to exploit the power that a peaky motor like a 600 offers.
Your facts come from a more educated position than mine. I'm not an engineer, just a lousy business student. But I know a bit of sh!t.
A bike like the V2k isn't at the cutting edge of technology, but I bet it would be a gas to ride.