| Author | Message | ||
     Vagelis46 |
Can anyone say how many extra RWHP the stock 1125R makes against a XB12R with the race kit ? Do we have dyno runs at the same dynamometer, same operator, same conditions ? Is it something like +20RWHP, +30RWHP, +40RWHP ? | ||
| Slaughter |
I'm betting the first runs will be the teams getting bikes ready for MotoST and they're de-tuning for lower HP (118 max allowed) I'd believe that you'd see 40 or more HP than the race-kitted XB12 but you're right to ask to see data from same dyno, same day, same conditions. | ||
| Beachbuell |
apples and oranges! | ||
| Vagelis46 |
"apples and oranges!" Why you say this ? Both the XB12R and the 1125R are Buell's sportbikes. Since most of the people, and myself, run the race kit & open airbox & other performance mods on their XB12R, I think it would be interesting for all of us, to see the extra HP of the 1125R against our current XB12R ! If it is something like +40RWHP, many people will be changing bikes very soon ! | ||
| Spike |
I'd estimate between 30-40rwhp at the peak. This chart shows a modified XB12 against a stock 1125R:  The runs were not made on the same day, but they were made on the same dyno and the results are SAE corrected to reflect differences in conditions. The XB12 is running XB9 pistons, K&N filter, Micron exhaust, and direct link tuning software. For what it's worth, my '04 XB12R made 89hp stock and 92hp with the race air cleaner on the same dyno. | ||
| Spike |
As you can see, the peak numbers really don't tell the whole story. RPM for RPM, the XB12 motor is really holding its own and actually has an advantage over the 1125R. However, if you keep the 1125R motor spinning above 6k rpm there really is no comparison. | ||
| Vagelis46 |
Are these plots on the same dyno ? Please clarify | ||
| Slaughter |
Look like they're on the same dyno - September and December. Those two curves REALLY tell the story - look at the USABLE torque. XB powerband barely spans a range of 3500 RPM and the 1125R is usable across more than a 6000 RPM range. That is probably the single most dramatic thing when you ride one. | ||
| Spike |
Yes, same dyno. Possibly the same operator, but I don't know for sure. | ||
| Vagelis46 |
Does anyone know what the XB12R would make with stock pistons and 10:1 compression, instead of 12:1 XB9 pistons? I am thinking of installing Wiseco pistons with 12:1 compression. What will be the gain ? Do I need different ECM tuning ? | ||
| Chadhargis |
Of course, you have to consider how reliable the motors are. A hopped up air-cooled XB motor versus a rather unstressed liquid cooled 1125 motor. It's still too early to tell, but I'm betting the water pumpers will be more reliable over the long haul. | ||
| Smoke |
chad, that's what i am also betting on. loving it. tim | ||
| Cataract2 |
Does anyone know what the XB12R would make with stock pistons and 10:1 compression, instead of 12:1 XB9 pistons? The XB12 uses 10:1 compression. Just has a longer stroke. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Vagelis: To get big HP from the XB engine you will have to deal with drivablity, fueling, and reliability problems, and that is just to get even with the 1125 in stock form. It will also cost a fortune. If you just love air cooled engines, then go for it, it will be fun for you. However, it cannot be justified in terms of performance for the money and aggravation. | ||
| Chadhargis |
Air cooled motors have their advantages, but I own both a Buell XB and a Gixxer 600, and I have to tell you, I prefer the liquid cooling. Keeps the engine temp stable and I typically only change coolant on a water pumper every two years, so maintenance isn't much more. Even if the water pump goes out, it's not hard to change. Even if the engines made the same power, I'd go with the liquid cooler just for the fact that I believe it will be less stressed. I may be arriving at that conclusion falsly, but that's the feeling I get. | ||
| Slaughter |
Here's a decent comparison - my XB racebike built for 6-8 hour endurance racing cost about $5000 for the engine work and it kinda/almost hits 100HP with some reliability. The XBRR kinda/almost hits 140HP but it can be finicky. Racing aircooled motors has advantages because of how the classes are defined but in a horsepower war, don't even TRY to enter an aircooled motor in the battle. | ||
| Baggermike |
I had given this allot of thought for like two month on weather to turn my ulysses into a monster or buy the 1125R my brain said xbxrr and my wallet said 1125R my wallet always wins. Mike | ||
| Steve_mackay |
But Slaughter, I don't remember ANY of the XBRRs with motor related failures. I think most of the finicky stuff is with the ignition and EFI itself. But if one is interested in hopping up their XBs, talk with Bud over at Hals. They are developing a few street hop up kits for XBs over the winter. | ||
| Slaughter |
I mean finicky in terms of engine setup and operation. At the Club race level, the RR does require at least a good inspection after each racing weekend. I'm involved in BOTH Glendale's XBRR raced by Jeff Dixon and Bartels RR-motored XB12 chassis bike raced by Fread Finnerty. For the same HP, if HP is the goal, you'd be better off with the 1125R than the RR. You're right, the RR engine got a bad rap because of clutches and ignition issues. We've seen none of those issues here at Willow but we're still trying to get the beasts properly tuned - they're running STRONG but because they are BOTH using different fuels than the Rockett that they were designed to run, they're taking some "talking to." Not only that, but they're both running different fuels from one to the other so we can't even share maps! Glendale is running VP and Bartels is running Sunoco. Glendale's RR - Jeff Dixon in the saddle - wins or podiums EVERY TIME HE RACES:  Bartels XBRR motored XB12:  I'm betting that at Willow Springs in the coming season, we'll be seeing MORE winning by the RR machines! (pics courtesy Asbjorn Doerman) (Message edited by slaughter on January 05, 2008) | ||
| Zac4mac |
Didn't get torque numbers, because we couldn't get to the plugs easily, but Buelliedan ran my 1125 on his dyno and it hit 126 HP in 5th at 155mph. Not bad for "out of the box" Dan said. Thanks, Dan, you rock! There were lots of "wow"s by all. Thanks Frank(F_skinner) and Steve(Maximum) for coming up, great to meet both of you. Steve and I had a great ride up to Lyons, got spat on a little with snow that melted to rain but it was a nice ride nonetheless. Took a short break at Oskar Blues, then headed home. Great Day Z | ||
| Vagelis46 |
How much power Jap IL4s make on this dyno, so that to have a relative comparison ? Or even better, how much power a modified xb12 or 999 or RSV or 1098 have made on this dyno ? Do you have info for any of these ? | ||
| Zac4mac |
No, Dan's shop is a Buell/Sportster shop. NRHS. http://www.nrhsperformance.com/ As we got there yesterday, he was pulling his Hot-Rod Sporty off the dyno and it ran a little over 100 HP. Stock XB9s are around 68, race kit 9s are around 78 on his dyno, he said. Z | ||
| Vagelis46 |
This dyno sounds a bit conservative..... | ||
| Doerman |
This dyno is located at 5000' above sea level. That altitude will show lower power numbers. About 1600 meters. (Message edited by doerman on January 06, 2008) | ||
| Vagelis46 |
What is this in meters ?? | ||
| Zac4mac |
Almost a mile, a little over 1.5 Km Z (Message edited by zac4mac on January 06, 2008) | ||
| Zac4mac |
Hey Asbjorn - it was worth the wait. Most un-freaking-believable bike I've ever thrown a leg over. Especially since I can chase the rev limiter now - 879 miles on her! Z | ||
| Doerman |
Isn't it though? I've owned many bikes in my life so far, several of them Buells. This one is just absolutely giving me the giggles every time I'm on it. I find myself "inventing" a lot of errands just so I can have an excuse to be on her. | ||
| Blake |
Some blathering... A corrected dynomometer result should not be noticeably affected by altitude or any other ambient conditions. The correction factors employed by Dynojet, whether SAE or STD take ambient conditions (temperature, atmospheric pressure, humidity) into account and adjust the actual uncorrected results to coincide with the applicable standardized SAE or STD conditions. I don't recall seeing a dynojet run for a stock XB9 report less than 72 SAE RWHP; a result that low (68 RWHP) is certainly not typical. Nor have I seen any XB9 race kit results that improve upon stock results by 10 HP. I don't think that much improvement is typical, more like 6 HP or so. Zac, do you know if your dyno result was corrected and if so to which standard, SAE or STD? The STD scheme corrects to a 59oF ambient air temperature at one atmosphere. If I recall correctly the SAE scheme corrects to somewhere near a 70oF ambient air temperature, so the SAE corrected results are lower by a noticeable percentage compared to STD corrected results. A 6th gear run would have also improved the reported results, as would ensuring a light touch on the rear axle weighting. Blah, blah, blah... Thanks for sharing the info and kudos to Dan for hosting your run. | ||
| Zac4mac |
Nothing on paper from the run. Dan said it's corrected for altitude when I got amped about "that good at this altitude". Don't know smoothing or even if it's a dyno-jet. I did see the curve on the screen, it was pretty smooth, no big blips, but little variations and levelled off at the end. I'm glad he didn't run it in 6th, that would have been unnecessarily rough on my tire, as he told me. At 155mph, there was enough slip on the drum, that Corsa looked like I did a burnout. Pretty sure the dyno at High Country IS a Dyno-Jet and it put my 03 XB9R at 76 or 78 HP. It had race ECM and muffler. Bottom line is, I don't miss my Firebolt nearly as much, now that I've got Loretta. Z |
