| Author | Message | ||
     Judd |
Three tenths yea,,, how much mph though? It would be stretching it to say 3mph. Prolly more like 1-2mph. A Torque Hammer has pretty much proven to add around 5- 10rwhp with no tuning. Same with a Drummer. Add tuning and get another 5hp. There are some reporting 150rwhp and 90ftlbs of torque with the Torque Hammer and the tuning. This slip on isn't like a Jardine. BTW,,, et has more to do with launch than the mph. Maybe the 120lb guy also was better in the 60ft too. Check out the time slips. A tenth in 60ft is equal to a a tenth and a half at the far end. In other words, a 1.60 sixty foot vs a 1.75 sixty foot would get your three tenths just as well as 50lbs of weight reduction. Weight does count bout 50lbs this way or that can easily be scrubbed by a better rider. (Message edited by judd on December 27, 2009) (Message edited by judd on December 27, 2009) | ||
| Blackflash |
I believe he is a better rider as well. I'm at the 1.70 range.Getting at a 1.6 would loose a couple more tenths as well.Tracks conditions also dictate the slip.Ill go through mny slips and see what I can find.The track I run usually has headwind as well.I do believe the torque hammer makes power.But i dont know how muchits worth to pay$$.I wish someone would have a shootout. | ||
| Judd |
Like I said, most are going from 130-135rwhp and around 75ftlbs of torque to around 140-150rwhp and around 90ftlbs of torque depending on whether it's tuned well or not. Tuning is good for some of that gain but man,,, anyway you look at it a 150rwhp and 90ftlb 1125CR would be one fun ride. In contrast, I've not seen those numbers put up yet buy any other slip on other than maybe the Drummer.Some of the lower cost slip ons are apparently just for making noise. | ||
| Blackflash |
I think those numbers are a little far fetched. I'll get a link up here. I have a buddy on a 07 r1 and he runs 10.0s and he makes a 150 true rwhp . Needless to say . I love my bike but he pretty much walks away from me any gear.I'll get a link up soon. | ||
| Blackflash |
http://www.factorypro.com/dyno/true1.html Look at a the 600 range bike then the 1000. I know a r1 or a gxsr or any newer 1000 will completely walk away from me. A 600 no. Keep in mind these 1000s have a broader rpm band. 150 hp I believe is achievable . But once again it will only be for a miniscule area on your tach. Verses a 1000 will hold that longer due to rpm area being longer. Longer lasting power!! Like I say I love my r but if were all talking about power here. Now sit on a rr for 40k and now were talking power. I would love to see dyno charts from that beast. But unfortunately all of us bluecollar worker can't put a lien on our house to buy one. O wait we can't even ride one on the road!! Briliant move!!god Harley sucked. | ||
| Judd |
I don't know about all that but I do know the numbers I quoted seem to be about right for a stock 1125 and they seem about right for a 1125 with a TH by most folks dynos. TH guarantees 140rwhp with no tuning I think. It's not unreasonable to think you might have a bike that would end up at 150rwhp with a TH and tuning I do not think. You can argue "true horsepower all you want but most on here use a dynojet dyno and most dynojet dynos have the stock 1125 at around 130rwhp and that same dynojet has 1125s with the TH at anywhere from 140s to around 150. The gain on the same dyno in the same conditions is what matters. Not the absolute number. But in the end,,, it's all bench racing and since I think I have my bike sold it's no biggie to me and I will probably never have "proof". Do some searching on the Buell boards on Torque Hammer and I think you will find roughly the same numbers I've posted. (Message edited by judd on December 27, 2009) | ||
| Blackflash |
Dyno jets are one of the worst synod to get true numbers.Even worse everyone uses one. Read the article!! | ||
| Judd |
The point I was trying to make is that people can argue all day long about this dyno's numbers vs that dyno's numbers. It's all BS. The facts are that it's the before and after on the same dyno in the same conditions that matter and since most folks use dynojet it's just fine for that comparison, maybe better since more people use them. Understand what I'm trying to convey here? | ||
| Blackflash |
I understand that part before and after. But what I'm implying is that these bikes don't make with this exhaust 150 true rwhp. in that article they state that 08 r1 makes 150ish trwhp . And if it makes that then there's no way in hell a 1125 makes 150 . A r1 will completly walk away from my bike . | ||
| Ccryder |
BF, the charts don't lie, or even the people that make them. Why can't a Helicon engine make 150 rw HP? Come on over and feel the difference b/t a stock 1125 and one with a TH and the proper map, it is a BIG difference! Later Neil S. | ||
| Judd |
Hmmm,,,, I ran something like 140mph on my R1 and it dynoed right around 145rwhp. If dude can run 137mph on his CR with around 145rwhp it looks like a wash. In the end,,, I don't care what dyno you use or what dyno says what. I do know that most are not disputing the 130rwhp numbers that most 1125s are putting putting down {130 rwhp seems about right for something like 140-145 crank} stock while running 130mph. Add a TH with tuning and it puts down around 145-150rwhp and the mph wicks up to 135-140mph. Seems pretty close to me. At the very least, not something to call BS on. | ||
| Ccryder |
+1 Judd | ||
| Blackflash |
I believe the th and a map does make more power but what trwhp does it make ?And is the map safe to use on a daily ride.You would have to seriously jack the timing up with addition fuel to get those results.I dont think that buells exhaust was that far off.122/126 to 150 rwhp?comeon.Thats almost a 20% increase in power. also, Go past the 1/4 mile mark on the drag with a r1 and a 1125r and then r1 will completely blow your doors off.Twistes different story.Note 1st gear in a r1 goes to 100 mph its in second gear at 125mph.Test ride a r1 you will be amazed.I might even buy one there so cheap right now even the cbrs are 6800 out the door at most honda shops.08s of course.Of course the low end is pretty bad but 7k to 13.5k its pure power.A 01 r1 champion edition was pretty close.That was my buds prior bike .He still got me and more after 130 mph.That trwhp website rated it at 125hp with a full system and a tune. | ||
| Judd |
OK, you win.  | ||
| Ccryder |
Please educate me, after all I've only been around Buells and dynos for 10+ years and motorcycles for 35+ years. BF, what is the difference b/t rwhp and trwhp?? Please give me some background on the origins of trwhp. | ||
| Westmoorenerd |
I'm with Ccryder...Wtf is this TRWHP you're talking about... Coming from modifying Mustangs I've never once heard TRWHP said... ps...looking through that site you posted, I find it amazing that an 01-03 GSXR1000 with exhaust, or a stock 05 GSXR1000 makes around the same "TRWHP" as a stock 99-07 Hayabusa. (Message edited by westmoorenerd on December 27, 2009) | ||
| Judd |
There has always been folks saying the Dynojet dynos read high. Even in the car world, Mustang brand dynos generally read a good bit lower {10-15%} and the people that have those dynos swear their dynos are generating the "true" horsepower numbers and the dynojets are too high. I honestly don't know for sure but....... Like I said though,,,, the actual numbers spit out are almost inmaterial as compared to differences shown between two different set-ups. In other words, stop sweating the small stuff and compare the before and after which is why you should be dynoing anyway right? Not to magazine race. I will say that my car was run on a dynojet and it's RWHP numbers match up nicely with most speed in the quarter mile/weight calculators and even the horsepower weight computers available today {G-Tech Pros ect.}. Will also say that the dynojet motorcycle numbers generated on most stock bikes correlate pretty nicely with the manufacturer's crankshaft numbers. In other words,,, Buell says the 1125s make around 145hp and around 85ftlbs of torque at teh crank. Dynojets usually have them at around 130 rwhp and 70-75ftlbs of torque. It lost 10-15 hp and about the same amount of torque once it got to the wheel. Sounds about right to me. If the dynojet was right there,,, why would it all of a sudden make up some BS numbers once a slip on and tuning were done? It wouldn't. Maybe the hp numbers the dynojets spit out are high but at least they are consistently high and in line with whatever dynos the manufacturers are using once you factor in drive line loss. In the grand scheme of thing,,, it's just not a good arguing point because I think a 150rwhp R1 and a 150rwhp will end up putting down pretty much comparable mph numbers no matter what backfire says. (Message edited by judd on December 28, 2009) | ||
| Blackflash |
I'm glad someone posted some timeslips that isn't 120lbs in the et thread. | ||
| Ccryder |
BF: Wtf is this TRWHP you're talking about? | ||
| Blackflash |
Trwhp is true rear wheel horsepower. I see that you didn't read the article. http://www.factorypro.com/dyno/true1.html that's what they talk about . And that is what I'm explaining that this bike doesnot make 150 rwhp as much as I would like it to . I emailed him about the r and asked if he dynoed one stock . Read the article about dyno jets. Which is used by everyone. I gave a good piece of information here and it looks like everyone can't pull themselves from there Christmas nog to read it. | ||
| Ccryder |
BF: Thanks for that link, it is very informative. I do remember the controversy about the V-Max and the Dyno-jet Dyno's. THe engineers at DJ just about blew a gasket when management demanded the s-ware be "adjusted" to meet the published numbers. This goes to show why dyno numbers really should only be used for comparo of changes during subsequent runs. It does not mean that dyno "A" is correct versus dyno "B". It does mean that you can compare relative numbers b/t dynos when the same engine is run on both in same state of tune. Time2Work Neil S. | ||
| Thefleshrocket |
According to motorcycle-usa.com, their 1125CR test bike put down 119rwhp. http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/78/4510/Motorcycle-A rticle/2009-Buell-1125CR-Comparison.aspx Their 1125R test bike put down 122rwhp. http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/9/3317/Motorcycle-Ar ticle/2009-Daytona-SportBike-Comparison.aspx Sport Rider, on the other hand, saw 130rwhp from their 1125R. http://www.sportrider.com/bikes/146_0809_2008_buel l_1125r/photo_03.html So clearly dyno results vary based on type of dyno, correction factors, etc. I'm a bit more inclined to use Sport Rider's dyno results as a basis for comparison as they've tested dozens if not hundreds of bikes on that same dyno and have all of the results posted on their website so they can be compared. | ||
| Highscore |
Are there any noise limits for drag racing? | ||
| Mike1125r |
No noise limits in U.S Drag Racing | ||
| Blackflash |
So from those results fleshrocket posted numbers vary 10%. | ||
| Highscore |
Without any limitation for noise I would prefer a megaphone-style exhaust for the Helicon engine, a single collector tube for the primary headers with a long cone and a matching over all length. Such an exhaust would not only be the strongest but also the lightest possible. The only race class, I know - drag racing is, where I live in Europe, absolutely exotic - , without any noise limit is F1-racing. And a F1-exhaust works as a megaphone in the kind described. Highscore | ||
| Easyrider |
Thefleshrocket, It is ALSO depending on what flash is inside the ECM. Some are good on WOT and some are les good on WOT. | ||
| Ccryder |
We may set a record this week, seven days in a row with the high temp below freezing. Night time down in the low "teens". So no riding next week much less any dyno runs till at least next weekend. | ||
| Buellishness |
I think this thread is about the impressions of the TH exhaust well I dont give a damn if it made my bike run the quarter in 8sec the exhaust looks like something the terminator would smoke hash out of!! good god damn it is ugly!! I will pass on the recycled sheet metal exhaust. and its over priced!! please make it aesthetically pleasing and I would go for it. | ||
| Ccryder |
David: you are just a sucker for a pretty face (LOL ). Form, function, buell's have always been about function. The cost you can blame on the "value" of the $, suck it up. Time4sleep |
