| Author |
Message |
    
Peace
| | Posted on Friday, April 13, 2001 - 08:13 am: | 
|
Blake
Try'd both 100hp scenario's and the results might surprise some and maybe this might start an argument, but this is what happened.
Buell tested on was a 1998 S1W with Race kit, yost power tube and thunderjet, internally stock with thunderstorm heads from factory. 5000 miles on engine, dyno tested before giving 88hp and 78ft/lbs torque, ran an 11.70 @ 113mph.
Flowed heads by Rick Goss were fitted with crane springs, only port work was undertaken no combustion chamber or valves were changed.
We fitted Taperlite pushrods and tubes and some Andrews tappets.
Dyno results were 99.2hp rear wheel and 81ft/lbs torque, at the strip the best it could muster was an 11.56 @ 115mph.
This bike was one of our demo's and at 5900 miles in this tune was cooked by one of our customers, resulting damage was a loose guide and bent valve rear cyl.We took the heads off and replaced any damaged parts, unfortunetly we needed the bike for the next day so didnt have the time to get hold of parts to fix cyl head.
Fitted stock thunderstorm heads, redshift 565 cams and crane valve springs, results we got were astonishing, 99.8hp rear wheel and 84ft/lbs torque, at the strip its best times were 11.25 @ 118mph.
This bike felt a lot quicker through the midrange compared to the flowed bike which seemed to thrive on revs.
I personally believe that both flowed heads and cams should be fitted together such as is on Rockets Buell as this works best everytime. |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, April 13, 2001 - 08:21 pm: |
|
Did the flowed heads hurt the compression ratio? |
Aaron
| | Posted on Monday, April 16, 2001 - 10:36 am: |
|
Duncan: That's a very interesting result!
I'll tell ya, I find this engine stuff fascinating. Sometimes it seems like just when I think I might kinda sorta be starting to understand it a little bit, along comes a result that turns my thinking upside down. The more I learn about it, the more I realize just how little I know.
So how the hell are the Red Shift grinds getting that much out of stock heads? More area under the curve? An exceptional set of stock heads? What's your theory?
I know Brian N. has broken 100rwhp with stock heads, but they were hand picked ... ADBA SS/Buell rules don't allow porting but he had access to a bunch of heads and put'em all on his flow bench and used the best ones.
Sounds like you guys are doing some good work over there, any more of these kinds of results you'd like to contribute would be most appreciated. The whole thing is like a big puzzle to me.
AW |
Mikej
| | Posted on Monday, April 16, 2001 - 11:19 am: |
|
I forget who asked this, local dyno time is $75 per hour. Parts additional. |
Ccryder
| | Posted on Monday, April 16, 2001 - 11:58 am: |
|
AW:
Just for grins I'd like to see what the torque curve looks like on the RR. I'll bet it pretty steep especially when you consider your unrestrictive, unsilenced exhaust system (What did that Local Smokey have to say about your limited noise abatement hardware?). Just color me curious.
Neil S. |
Aaron
| | Posted on Monday, April 16, 2001 - 01:20 pm: |
|
Neil: You thinking torque on gasoline or torque on nitrous? Two very different things, in both position and size.
On gasoline, it's weak until the motor crosses about 4300 rpm, then shoots up to a peak at about 5600rpm, then gradually declines. I can change the exhaust and slide that peak left or right. Farther to the right adds a little top end power but makes the powerband so narrow that it threatens the shift into top gear. We were on the ragged edge last year, the motor really bogged bad on that shift, but recovered very slowly. We've changed the gearbox and that situation should be improved now. I might even tweak the exhaust to make the motor a little peakier.
On the nitrous, the torque generally peaks a little earlier for whatever reason, and at a very impressive level. That 160hp pull I posted had a tach pickup issue, something that happened more than once when the nitrous was cranked way up, so I can't show torque for it. Nitrous is apparently taxing the ignition. I think I may have a 156hp pull with torque that I can share, though, let me check when I get home. I don't mind posting these because they don't resemble the actual state of tune we'll be running.
Noise was an issue when we were tuning at Chuck's shop, the cops harassed us once. But where I live, so far no complaints. Not that I'd pay attention if they did complain. I don't think there's a noise ordinance out here in the country.
See ya,
AW |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Monday, April 16, 2001 - 01:50 pm: |
|
Aaronitis :
I saw Duncan at the strip today. He reminds me of you. Only gives away as much as he wants to. I'm looking forward to his response  .
Fascinating stuff for non dyno dabblers, such as I !
If I make Croix I'll be sure to nag you for a seat of the pants appraisal of my boat anchor.
Rocket in England
. |
Peter
| | Posted on Monday, April 16, 2001 - 02:37 pm: |
|
IF you make Croix....????
What's this "if" •••• batman?
PPiA |
Admin
| | Posted on Monday, April 16, 2001 - 09:53 pm: |
|
•••• = "shit" courtesy of admin. |
Aaron
| | Posted on Monday, April 16, 2001 - 10:45 pm: |
|
142 ft/lbs of TORQUE |
Peter
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2001 - 02:28 am: |
|
Admin,
I know •••• = shit, but I thought I better not write it.....
PPiA |
Peter
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2001 - 02:31 am: |
|
HOLY SHIT Aaron, that's a lot of power for an XR1000!
PPiA |
Aaron
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2001 - 09:09 am: |
|
I know, it just absolutely amazes me. That nitrous stuff is magic.
Unfortunately, when you relate that to potential top speed, there's a huge diminishing return. It takes gobs more power to run just a little bit faster.
A good fairing is worth a lot of horsepower.
See ya,
AW |
X1mchip
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2001 - 07:31 pm: |
|
Hey Aaron
I have a good fairing, want to use it?
Chip |
Aaron
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2001 - 09:51 pm: |
|
Chip: you have a damn good fairing!
I don't know if you're aware of this, but the RR is the slipperiest production motorcycle ever made.
I suspect mine's actually just a whisker slipperier than yours, though ... headlight has been filled in, and the seat area has some changes. Plus it's lower.
At the speeds we're going at Bonneville, I figure that fairing is worth roughly 35hp over an S2 fairing. That's based on some actual data, not a guess.
AW |
Court
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2001 - 06:02 am: |
|
Chip:
Aaron is right......there's LOTS more packaged in the RR that you may yet realize.
Sometime check out the cd on your bike and say the 2001 Porsche 911/996 or the Lomborghini Diablo.
SURPISE....CHIP WINS ! |
Blake
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2001 - 06:47 am: |
|
All those dang drag creatin' stickers too! |
Buellzebub
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2001 - 12:36 pm: |
|
dumb question:
how does the rr1200 drag cooefficient compare to the hyabusa's?
sport rider [i think, not sure] does a wind tunnel test in the newest issue between a busa and a kwaq 1200, i don't recall the numbers but they say the busa is the slipperiest bike on the market. i'll post the c/d as soon as i can |
Aaron
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2001 - 01:43 pm: |
|
I was told that the 'busa comes very close, and it's the only bike they've tested that does. I don't doubt that the 'busa is the slipperiest bike on the market. |
Chuck
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2001 - 11:37 pm: |
|
the "busa" must be the slipperiest "cuz" its definitely the ugliest. |
Chuck
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2001 - 11:37 pm: |
|
IMHO |
Buellzebub
| | Posted on Sunday, April 22, 2001 - 01:33 pm: |
|
Sport riders coefficient of drag was extrapolated using Photoshop to find the frontal area, so it may not be correct. here it is anyways: cda (sq. ft.) =3.37 |
Dynodave
| | Posted on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 01:35 am: |
|
d:\daves-pics  dyno.jpg |
Dynodave
| | Posted on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 01:45 am: |
|
The above is an image of a Toledo Meter dyno run of my 88" S1.
The major divisions are 10 units; the 'gap' or white row is the century mark. The chart starts at 2000 RPM; the solid lines were the second run done after the carb and muffler were changed. (at $75 a pop for the mufflers I can afford to experiment)
Cam was the Andrews N4 or SE-1, running a motor built at Yankee Enginuity in San Jose. YE ported the T-Storm heads, installed a 4-piece windage setup and S&S rods; exhaust consisted of a Buell race pipe and a 2.5 by 12" glass pack mounted in reverse direction.
Note the W I D E area where the TORQUE is over 90 ft-lbs. You get that with those mild cams!!! |
Pammy
| | Posted on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 10:28 am: |
|
Here is the chart from my dyno;
 |
Tripper
| | Posted on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 11:12 am: |
|
Pammy: can you describe what is in that motor? Approximate total cost to duplicate?
Thanx! |
Aaron
| | Posted on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 11:20 am: |
|
Wow, a 5800rpm torque peak.
What's it got for an exhaust? |
Smadd
| | Posted on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 01:37 pm: |
|
and look where the torque is between 3.5 and 7 grand... over 100 ft/lbs!!
Okay Pammy... fess up. I've heard a lot of talk of this bike (as well as seen it in action.. but not lately). Is it still quite the handful to ride since more work has been done? I understand it's downright scary to ride... not exactly an angel on the street! Maybe not a good choice if it's your only bike??
Steve |
Aaron
| | Posted on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 01:49 pm: |
|
Yeah, I noticed! Hence the exhaust question ... when I tune the LSR bike's exhaust for a similar torque peak position, I lose everything below 4000rpm. Somehow this bike is continuing to get a good fill well below that. |
Smadd
| | Posted on Monday, April 23, 2001 - 03:29 pm: |
|
I just called Pammy and gave her "what for". Ya can't post a chart and not be prepared to discuss it! She claims she's busy with "work" and will be back later. Yeah... right!  I think she's probably just sitting at her desk counting money (does that answer your question Tripper??).
Anyway Aaron... I know this much: The pipe was built by Cycle-Rama. I know Pammy will correct me if I'm wrong (duh)... but it's probably one of those homely "step" jobs they build for performance applications. Hmmmm... should I tell them about the Coke can Pammy?
Steve |
|
»
Buell Dynamometer/Dyno Testing Archives »
Archive through April 23, 2001