why not??

[NiteW4tcher]

There was no way any bike was ever going to beat that 4 wheeled machine. I refrain from calling it a car - it was extremely light frame, housing the equivalent of 3 bikes engines (over 500bhp), had 4 wheels so double the ground contact. I could go on. But that's not really a test - how many of us will ever own uprated ariel atoms? Even if you had the money to buy a supercar, it would be more likely to be something you could drive day to day. At best a Pagani Zonda, more likely a ferrari/koernegzeg etc. And none of those would have beaten the BMW... The only show to have shown real car vs bike tests on mainstream tele was 5th Gear, and then the bikes usually kicked ass...

well said

[Scotty]

That "car" was pretty impressive, but then again anything with a power:weight ratio of 900bhp/tonne would be - my 2004 ZX-10R's only got about 815 and that doesn't hang around, but it also cost a lot less than £150k. To be fair, Brogie gave it a run for its money and it only got by on the brakes in a couple of places, from one of which there was no place to get back past before the line. :

If comparing a bit more "like for like" in terms of production-based vehicles with similar levels of practicality, perhaps they could pit that uprated Atom against Biaggi's WSB-winning Aprilia RSV4, with its power:weight ratio of around 1375bhp/tonne, a bike that other WSB riders likened to a MotoGP bike in the way that it just cleared off down the straights, not even giving a slipstream for other bikes to hang onto... now THAT would be a race... 8-)

[redken1]

I watched Top Gear on BBCi player. In my view it is entertaining as a comedy show, but certainly has no credence as a serious car programme. :