| Author |
Message |
    
M1combat
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 06:17 pm: | 
|
Ooooh sounds fun... You can only blow it up at 160  . |
Darthane
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 06:33 pm: |
|
Well, the Buell race bikes run 8000+, but they use the XB9 stroke...that whole piston speed thing again. |
M1combat
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 07:00 pm: |
|
They use two different strokes depending on the track. |
Darthane
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 07:13 pm: |
|
...and I'll bet they use two different rev limits, as well.  |
Wyckedflesh
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 07:32 pm: |
|
Yeah the long stroke motor revs out to 7500rpm, the short to 8500 according to the above posted quotes. Which falls right in line with what I was thinking. |
Blake
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 10:29 pm: |
|
I think the short stroke Buell race bikes are using a "special" crank with a "special" stroke.
Mike,
You nailed it. Way to go. If speed doubles, the force quadruples and the distance covered in the same time interval also doubles. Work is force times distance and power is work divided by time interval, so if the speed doubles and the force quadruples, in the same amount of time, we are covering twice the distance pushing four times the load, thus we need 8 times the power. Ain't physics cool? |
Mikep
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 01:54 pm: |
|
Yes, Physics is great.
And it most likey takes 120 - 135 rwhp to run 160 mph on a faired bike.
mike |
M1combat
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 02:23 pm: |
|
Didn't I read somewhere that the naked Buell is VERY aerodynamic? |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 02:49 pm: |
|
No naked bike with a rider sitting on it is going to be very aerodynamic. The Buells are thin which helps aerodynamics relative to a naked IL4 machine. |
M1combat
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 03:02 pm: |
|
Gotcha. For the record I was referring to the R model if that makes any difference. I thought that a lot of the reason for the good aero on an R was the redirecting of a good deal of air into the pressure pocket at the rear of the bike. |
Lightisright
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 04:35 pm: |
|
And the XB's aren't pushing a barn door radiator through the air either. But I'd have to think the full fairing sportbikes would still have an advantage over the half faired R. |
Firebolt020283
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 04:41 pm: |
|
well theres a quick fix through a full faring on the r problem solved on the airodynamics |
Wyckedflesh
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 04:44 pm: |
|
I know when I have topped out my XB12, when I come up on the 140 indicated <---(note that word please) the motor is still pulling strong and the needle is still sweeping upwards. So what I am thinking is that if the gearing was better or the revlimiter went to 7500 we might find a 150 indicated <---(again note the choice of words) This would lead me to believe that hitting the magic 160 indicated wouldn't take as much reconstruction as is being suggested. 94rwhp hitting a 140 indicated and climbing might mean that say 110rwhp would hit a 160 indicated. Since realistically what we are talking about is a 160 indicated since Tatsu wants to keep up with his buddies who are hitting 160 indicated. Am I making any sense? |
Fullpower
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 08:03 pm: |
|
yes wycked good sense. i agree just raising the rev limit would instantly raise your top speed. when you hit the 6800 rpm limit you are no where near the aerodynamic limit and the horsepower is still climbing steeply at that point also. just letting the motor rev to 7500 would give 154 mph. i have no doubt that the stock motor could live there for a little while, and i think there is a fair chance that it would make enough HP to push 7500 in top gear. |
