| Author |
Message |
    
Jens
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 08:38 pm: | 
|
Hi Saro,
RR Topends on normal XB wont fit. The RR use a larger cylinderbolt pattern.
Jens
www.hillbilly-motors.com |
Jon
| | Posted on Monday, January 30, 2006 - 12:48 am: |
|
Been reading your posts, Jen. Really appreciate your input and perspective.
You too, Terry. |
Blake
| | Posted on Monday, January 30, 2006 - 08:01 pm: |
|
Does anyone know if the XBRR uses longer rods than the XB9? Might explain the perceived taller case deck.
Yes, and as Jens pointed out the need for a taller deck and thus longer rods stems from the mongo 4.08" bore.
Is it me or are the pushrod tubes not parallel?
Not you. Not parallel.
What kinda affect would that have on people trying to install RR parts on XB or even XL bottom ends?
None, as the parts are not made to fit stock engines.
Does this bike have equal front & rear exhaust lengths?
Dunno.
The intakes are individual. Do the exhaust headers run into a common collector or do they have independent paths through the muffler? Like 2 in, 2 out...
Common collector and muffler very much like its stock XB sisters.
The XB9 and Blast already have the same short stroke. What about the RR bottom end makes it tolerate even higher revs than the XB9 while having a GIGANTIC EFFING PISTON? Kinda why I was curious about conrod length....
More robust design through optimum engineering.  |
Whodom
| | Posted on Monday, January 30, 2006 - 08:33 pm: |
|
The XB9 and Blast already have the same short stroke. What about the RR bottom end makes it tolerate even higher revs than the XB9 while having a GIGANTIC EFFING PISTON? Kinda why I was curious about conrod length....
More robust design through optimum engineering.
Not to mention that there doesn't appear to be one ounce of metal in that piston that's not needed to support the wrist pin, withstand the combustion pressures, and/or hold the rings in position. It looks almost like a skeleton piston. |
Firemanjim
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 02:42 am: |
|
Interesting post from over on Sacborg re XBRR horsepower---
what do you make of the new XBRR motor, and do you think it could be the basis of a good Bonneville effort?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh hell yes. They fixed the real problem with the motor by standing up the intake valve which allowed them to get rid of the S curve in the intake tract.
Either that 150hp figure is real conservative (which wouldn't surprise me a bit, and in fact I heard rumblings of much more), or they've got the thing detuned. We're getting more than that out of our current 82" motors, we've broken 140rwhp, and we're not twisting them as tight and they're not as oversquare. I think somebody's sandbagging |
M1combat
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 10:35 am: |
|
Of course someone's sand bagging.
I'm thinking 175-180 at the crank in FX race trim.
What do I know though? |
Glitch
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 11:03 am: |
|
How much HP does it take to get the XBRR up to 160mph on a track?
If you know that you'll have a clue as to much HP the XBRR is putting to the asphalt. |
Wyckedflesh
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 11:07 am: |
|
For a race bred engine, one thing to keep in mind, Driveline losses are between 6%-8% instead of 13%. Better clutch, better gear cuts, tighter fit etc etc etc.
One other thing your not taking into concideration Hogs, its not so much the Peak horsepower, as it is what shape that power curve takes on. With the engine able to safely rev to 8500-8800 as oppossed to 7500-8000, that gives you a broader range for power delivery. Sure you can build a reliable 120RWHP street engine for the numbers you quoted and such, but just how useable is that powerband? Is it a 120rwhp at WOT with it being a 20-25hp jump in a 500rpm band at the top? (exagerated numbers btw just as a basis of discussion) or does the motor hit 100rwhp at say 4000rpm and smoothly climb to 120rwhp over the next 3500rpm? Which would you rather have on the street btw? |
Diablobrian
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 12:42 pm: |
|
road racing world's print article lists it as 150rwhp. for whatever that'as worth. |
Skully
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 01:19 pm: |
|
How much HP does it take to get the XBRR up to 160mph on a track?
If you know that you'll have a clue as to much HP the XBRR is putting to the asphalt.
When Erik was in Dallas week, he talked about the shape of the fairings. He mentioned that the bike was extremely stable at 178 mph...
Keith |
Blublak
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 02:07 pm: |
|
hehehehehe... He said.. "the bike was extremely stable at 178mph"
Ok, think back.. The RR's had the slickest fairings ever. So, combine a well heeled and slippery fairing with the raw grunt I'm sure they built that thing for.. That's a monster, no matter HOW you look at it.. now, knowing how tight lipped Mr. B. is in regards to what's coming up.. do you think he let that slip and didn't realize it? Think again, how many hard racers (like Cicotto, Picotte, McWilliam etc.) would stop pushing the bike as soon as it got a 'little loose' on the track? I'll bet the 150 number was in 'friendly' mode.. not when going to war.. |
186bigtwin
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 04:21 pm: |
|
I'm going down to Daytona and watch practice we'll see how fast that thing will go through the traps , This should be the best showing since Lucifers Hammer. 178 mph, hmmm? That sounds like 150 rwhp or at least real close.The sound on the banking will be heaven! |
Hogs
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 05:39 pm: |
|
Hey Wyckedflesh,
Based on your Hypothetical statement there is only one as you say.. or does the motor hit 100rwhp at say 4000rpm and smoothly climb to 120rwhp over the next 3500rpm?
By the way did you every get that rear R subfrmae back I think it was you and IF so do you want to part with..?
(Message edited by hogs on February 02, 2006) |
Wyckedflesh
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 07:15 pm: |
|
Nope I haven't gotten it back yet, but I have had another project/rebuild come up inwhich it looks like I will need it anyways.
My point Hogs was that yes you can take and build an engine, but it takes worked research to build that engine to a purpose. Somewhere in that worked research you spent conciderable money. The race teams you mentioned didn't just bolt the engine together and go. The successful ones took the entire previous season making their bikes work. What Buell has done is taken all of their input, and don't think someone somewhere wasn't listening to the race teams, and packaged it up as best they could. What you are essentially getting with that motor is a 'performance package'. One that will allow you hypethetically, though I know a really good race team could pull it off, race Lightweight twins in the morning, swap out the cylinders/pistons and heads, the ECM and go race FX in the afternoon. Can you currently do that with your street built engine? That is part of the engineered flexabilty Buell has proposed. Think of it this way, You could have your daily grind econo motor for Monday thru Friday...come home from work Friday night, swap the top end, the ECM and go rip up the streetdrags on Saturday, then put the bike back as it was on Sunday... |
Hogs
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 08:14 pm: |
|
HEy Wyckedflesh,
Yeah I agree with that there... Theres no question about it...takes alot of trial and effort (R&D) for sure... |
Hogs
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 08:22 pm: |
|
Just wondering though IF a fella took a stock XB12 and did the simple mods ya know , exhaust,race ecm,k&N, open air box and outer cover and cleaned up the casing in the stock heads (port and Polish)(NOT to remove any great amount of MEat) and installed a 88 kit what wd. one expect to get 100 lbs torque?? 110 HP. and be reliable.. Seems like this is the million dollar ???
I wd. think the 100 lbs. of torque wd. be there with the Big bore...and... The power wd. be good for a streetable machine..
(Message edited by hogs on February 02, 2006) |
186bigtwin
| | Posted on Friday, February 03, 2006 - 09:01 am: |
|
Hogs, I've had an 88 in. XL for ten years, a good street port job with a little more cam will produce an easy 110 rwhp. Mines been very reliable enginewise @ 116 rwhp. |
186bigtwin
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 08, 2006 - 02:40 pm: |
|
Hogs, call Wes Brown @ Cyclerama down in Tampa, he can make you an 88 incher that makes anywhere from 110 to 140+RWHP. All depends on what you want and how much you want to spend$$$$. |
Hogs
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 08, 2006 - 02:48 pm: |
|
140 horsepower Hmmm wonder how dependable that wd.be... Wd. I get two years unlimited mileage warranty LoL..
Yup Thanks know all about them 186bigtwin..Thanks Bro
(Message edited by hogs on February 08, 2006) |
|
XBRR Threads Consolidated Here! »
Xbrr/xbr Horsepower ratings..
