Author |
Message |
Kevyn
| Posted on Monday, August 20, 2001 - 11:07 pm: |
|
Jose, R.I.P. XR750? If and when the XR750 is retired from racing where will all those motors go?...Personally, I am excited to think that the "Fire Breathers" 'could' potentially be available for, ahem, continued 'off road use only'...talk about torque curves! Kevyn S12T |
Blacksix
| Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2001 - 12:18 am: |
|
I read recently where Rich King just turned his fastest lap on one of these Dirt Track Blast. Fun stuff if these XR750 are "retired". |
Tripper
| Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2001 - 02:42 pm: |
|
I haven't heard of XR-750 going away soon. They are going to bring the Super Tracker bikes into the big boys class next year, so the XR-750 will have competition from Japanese motors (Suzi TL) and BIG Buell's such as Nallins beast. |
Jssport
| Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2001 - 04:29 pm: |
|
The Grand Nationals (XR750) and the Supertrackers are different races. When the Supertrackers are made into the Grand National event, expect to see the XR 750's as a support class. There is talk of allowing pushrod twins to have a large displacement (1200cc). There will be no big bore motors racing in this class. |
Fastback69
| Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2001 - 04:53 pm: |
|
How much have the xr750 motors changed since the beginning? I've heard that they're pretty mean little motors. |
Aaron
| Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2001 - 05:41 pm: |
|
I hear a good XR750 can break 100rwhp ... that's about 2.2hp per ci. State of the art in Harleys is considered to be about 1.75. I'm talking unboosted, on gasoline. |
Jima4media
| Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2001 - 06:48 pm: |
|
A lot of flat trackers here in California are running Rotax powered bikes, because they are light cheap, and powerful. Look up Ron Wood Rotax and CCM Rotax on yer internet search engines. Jim X-2.5 |
José_Quiñones
| Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2001 - 10:07 pm: |
|
Yes they are currently different classes, but next year they will race together, and that's why I say that the XR750's are on their way to the museum or to the vintage racing classes. The current Brian Nallin tuned SuperTracker displaces 1246 cc
|
José_Quiñones
| Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2001 - 10:12 pm: |
|
From the AMA press release I posted earlier: The SuperTracker Series, in contrast, employs machines based on production-built, four-stroke twin-cylinder engines displacing 900cc to 1250cc, depending on the method used for engine cooling and valve actuation. This displacement differential is designed to compensate for the engineering allowances inherent in production-based designs, as opposed to engines conceived on a drawing board specifically for track use. So far, Suzuki has been the most active newcomer, campaigning machines based on the TL1000 powerplant in SuperTrackers, as well as a modified SV650 in Grand National class competition. Ducati, Yamaha and Buell have also been involved, while other manufacturers continue to develop plans. |
Jasonl
| Posted on Wednesday, August 22, 2001 - 05:26 pm: |
|
I know XR's can put out some power but I doubt they could put out that power for any more time than it takes to win a race. I'm sure they're highly tuned. I really DIG that supertracker series. Finally a series to directly translates to street motors instead of NASCAR-esque rules that have very little to do with street performance. |
Blake
| Posted on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 06:24 pm: |
|
Would someone who really knows please explain to me how it is that Buell advertises a dry weight of 385 LB, but when measured by Motorcyclist, the dry weight is found to be 413 LB?! That's a significant difference of 28 LB equating to 7% of the measured weight! That 28 LB would amount to well over three gallons of fuel or oil! Either the Motorcyclist measurement was highly inaccurate, or the factory's definition of "dry weight" is substantially different than the weight of the bike less fluids, or the factory goofed their weight estimate big time, or the factory published the "targeted dry weight" as "actual dry weight." Which is it I wonder? |
Rocketman
| Posted on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 08:09 pm: |
|
Isn't dry weight supposed to be dry as in no gas, but all other liquids are present ? Rocket in England |
Raymaines
| Posted on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 08:18 pm: |
|
That all depends on who you ask. How about no air in the tires even! Don't even ask about oil in the forks or shock. Then we can round down to the nearest big number. How honest do you want to be? |
José_Quiñones
| Posted on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 09:36 pm: |
|
No battery either! The japanese all play the same game. Figure the XB9R to come in at about 440 lbs wet. The thing they are doing again is hiding the true wet weight by listing the load rating as the difference between the GVWR and the dry weight. I HATE IT WHEN THEY DO THAT! That said, the XB9R has a greater load rating than all the other models 850 - 440 = 410 lbs, not the 465 lbs they mention in the brochure. |
Tripper
| Posted on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 10:12 pm: |
|
I like the DucatiWeight rating. They list as ready to ride less gas. In other words as they hand it over to you with oil and fluids in the bike. They also have dyno charts of every bike on the web site. |
|