http://wallstcheatsheet.com/automobiles/10-fastest-road-bikes-in-the-world.html/?a=viewall

Only #7?! I thought ZX14R was the fastest. I know those ones with jet engines are faster but with regular gasoline engines. Busa is faster than ZX14R? I am shocked!!

"#9...The CBR 1000 RR easily dusts everything in its wake"...maybe in it's wake...but it's got a helluva lot more work ahead of it to even CATCH a 14R.That statement outta tell ya somethin about these reviews.

LOL
I don't agree, period!!

The 14R is the current quickest in the quarter mile. There's one or two bikes that are faster 0-60 by a tenth and then some other bikes are faster in other parts of the spectrum. In a street race most of it would come to rider experience for the most part.

Wow, interesting for sure!
I would say two things...
1) they are crazy if they think the 14r is rated as stated
2)I don't think many of us ride a bone stock 14r

A considerable number of these beasts makes one wonder about the definition of "production"... LOL!!! "Bonneville" runs, and other similar "special' conditions really begs the question of "stock", off the showroom floor, and "production" so to speak. For that, I believe that the 14R and to give credit where it's due - the Busa - probably reign supreme in the world we tend to live in... LOL!!!
.
It's all good and fine for the "review" to claim something faster... Look at #6 - with the "right rider" it can do 190.. That review does not say that it's faster than the 14R. Why it's #6, who knows...
.
As for #5... the BMW - A “lightly modified” version of the bike hit 203 mph recently in Maxton, North Carolina, which was the second time the S 1000 RR broke the 200 mph mark". REALLY? No problem, but it goes back to "production" vs "lightly modified"; and in that case, unless we know it was just an ECU flash..., then it can be said that on a couple of very special ocassions, it's not going to beat the 14R with consistent 200 mph demonstrations.
.
The Busa at #4? Somebody disconnected the speed limiter, and the fact of the matter here is that it tops at 194...
.
At #3.... The Ducati... I quote, "Upgrade to a “track-only” exhaust and the horsepower power quotient gets especially violent for a bike (202 hp.) In this configuration, Ducati allows that the Panigale can hit 200 mph. Repeat: track-only, folks". Well that pretty much takes it out of the "fastest" by the standards applied by the "reviewers"... Production means production, not some special order version. If we upgrade the 14R with a "special exhaust", etc., we will be well above the Ducati claim of 200 mph...
.
At #2 - the Lightning... I argue that it is not a regular production bike. Period. It's a specialty, niche, and by other reviews, a extremely LIMITED production "special" item. I suspect that the "reviewers" overlooked the reality of "production" and relied upon the free breakfasts, t-shirts, etc. Sucked into the manufacturer's propaganda machine, I say.
.
#1... MTT's turbine... Again, my comments for #2 apply.
.
My argument here is that after going up the list (to the so-called "fastest"), it's obvious and evident that the reviewers simply relied upon the "advertised" speed provided by the PR wonks associated with the respective "offerings".
.
I also find it disconcerting that the reviewers simply ignored the 186 mph federally mandated number as the maximum "speed" for the other bikes built or imported into the USa. But... They surely did apply that to the 14R. Further, they certainly did not apply the same "stock production" decsriptions to the others... If that "standard" of 186 was applied, then most of the so-called top ten would be "equal".
.
To be honest it appears that their standard as to what's fastest "production" was not applied to the 14R. The others certainly and demonstrably got a "free ride", what with the caveats they applied in their cursory examination... And examination is about all it was. The article was not written by someone of substance who actually took the bikes listed to the track and found out for themselves what reigns supreme. Collecting and editing the manufacturers data, at least in this so-called review, points to less than valid "list' they made.
.
Taking a so-called production bike, allowing "minor" mods, referring to race only versions, and accepting the fact that "production" is equivocal in interpretation, the reviewers have done nothing more than create a biased "advertisement" that is questionable in it's intent; and can be said to show bias towards the unique specials that certainly don't meet the requirements for pure production.
.
On that note... it would seem likely that the 14R is likely the fastest, sustained top speed motorcycle in current production...
.
Just my take on the article (if one can apply that term to the biased exotic "love fest" screed that it really is...)

* Last updated by: groomlake on 10/19/2014 @ 7:07 AM *

LOL!Screed...there's a new one;)

Take that limiter off the 14...she'll hit 200.They talk about 'fastest'...hell...what does THAT mean?Naturally a lighter bike with good power to weight ratio is gonna be...'quicker'...but fastest?Nah.These 1000's can't actually hang with the 14 in the real world.Maybe carving...but that's about it.Yeah...they're fast...having a limiter and saying 186 like it's NOT the fastest or something...dumb.

I probably couldn't...but lots of street riders are balsy and skilled enough to take a 14 and mop the floor with these 1000's on this review.Silly article really.

* Last updated by: Grn14 on 10/19/2014 @ 7:36 AM *

The Yamaha YZF-R1 is rated above the ZX-14R. I don't see a stock R1 beating a 14R under any circumstances in any kind of a straight line race, riders being anywhere near equal.

"The Yamaha YZF-R1 is rated above the ZX-14R. I don't see a stock R1 beating a 14R under any circumstances in any kind of a straight line race, riders being anywhere near equal."

Ask the guy on the 57 freeway with an R1 when a blue ZX14R blew past him, don't know who that was .....

It's odd how they post 186+ on some bikes and not on others. Currently there is no regulation restricting top speed on bikes. The who-ha started in Europe where they wanted to restrict bikes but not cars? Never did fully understand why, probably resistance from the Italians and Germans.

If you unrestrict all the mentioned bikes and leave everything else stock I just don't see anything except the electric and turbines bikes coming anywhere close. Range on the electric and turbine are SEVERLY limited so they whould be dead on the shoulder while the ZX is still screaming. Whoever wrote the article probably knew something about bikes but not much!!! I also challenge the definition of "production" as it is related in the article.

I say bring 'em on, the ZX will suck the paint off their gas tanks and batteries!!!

AGREED. Put any of those bikes near me and it's diner time.

I believe it was France that banned bikes faster than 186 mph (300 kph). Manufacturers complied to not limit sales, and it was easier to just limit all exports.

I love it when those middleweights try and hang, hold 3rd, against the stop, don't even twitch that wrist, fraction shift, 4th is melted as your synapses catch up enough to bang 5th,
Bring some friends, pack a large lunch, the 14's are eating, and it's on that slow assed bunch.

This is just a silly article. some bikes might be faster because they don't exactly adhere to the 186 "limit/agreement" - like the busa. So what, that one of them eeked out 194 mph when it should have stopped at 186 just like all the other manufacturer's that stick to the agreement. Maybe they pumped up the tires to make them taller? Maybe Suzuki cheats?

Only way to rank any of these bikes, especially when there are some that have a limiter and some that don't, is to disable them all and see whats that. same day, same rider. I mean, they go right ahead and mention that a zx14r hit 208+ in Australia with a gearing mod and tire change. That would bump it up to 3rd at least.

Totally useless rankings.

Well, in addition to being faster, the ZX14 LOOKS better than most of the others anyway, so ...

The entire article is nonsense. Using their criteria, they should have used a flashed, NOS ZX14 with a "slightly modified" cylinder head. And maybe just a "little" turbo. If you are gonna compare stock bikes, they must be ...uh...STOCK!

Mad

Hey, I'm no great rider, yet I really like my chances of beating #2 and #1 ... cuz I ain't ever gonna run into one on the road

I'm quicker than everything on the list. I'll even put my stock exhaust back on and maintain that statement.