Author |
Message |
Barker
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 02:21 pm: |
|
New gearing in City cross. Might be another buell.com typo. Using gear commander I can up with this. 07 XB9X top speed = 137mph 08 XB9X top speed = 153mph 153mph if the HP and Aerodynamics can keep up! |
Tintin74
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 02:51 pm: |
|
Might be the european specs. I think the european bikes were geared towards higher speeds. You have to crouch and go downhill with a back wind on a long stretch of (closed) road to reach the top speed though... |
Barker
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 02:58 pm: |
|
us specs. I have double checked all of my figures. try it your self, please prove me wrong. 08 US Specs http://www.buell.com/en_us/bikes/streetfighter/xb9 sx/specs.asp gear calc http://www.xs4all.nl/~ator0437/gc/ |
Cereal
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 03:01 pm: |
|
I wouldn't doubt if it was a mistake. It also says in the specs for the XB9SX that it has the 1203 motor further down on the sheet. Unless the fixed it already. |
Barker
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 03:10 pm: |
|
08 XB9SX
07 XB9SX
|
Spatten1
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 03:13 pm: |
|
Good luck getting that bike to pull 150mph. Better be going down hill with a 20mph wind at your back. |
Court
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 03:47 pm: |
|
The bugs are getting addressed. The gearing charts, as we pretty well proved at Bonneville, are primarily for entertainment. Thanks for the input! |
Djkaplan
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 04:54 pm: |
|
If you did regear an XB9 like that, I bet the real world top speed would actually be slower (in 5th gear). |
Barker
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 05:42 pm: |
|
It is top speed without wind resistance/HP variables. Potential of drive systems @ redline. Yes It would be crazy to get the cityX that fast. (Message edited by barker on July 10, 2007) |
Fullpower
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 06:45 pm: |
|
An XB9 may well achieve 150 miles per hour................ if you throw it out of an airplane. |
Shazam
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 07:09 pm: |
|
mine does 159 on the GPS... |
Spatten1
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 07:12 pm: |
|
Time for a new GPS. |
Diablobrian
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 07:29 pm: |
|
shazam your bike is even less of a "9" than mine is, and mine is currently a 1250. |
Barker
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 08:12 pm: |
|
"An XB9 may well achieve 150 miles per hour................ if you throw it out of an airplane." I just calculated the speeds of of a XB9X tossed out of a aiplane. According to my clacs. You would only need to go up about 4000 ft up in the airplane. I should reach 150mph right before in hits the ground. |
Shazam
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 10:46 pm: |
|
says xb9r right on the title..... you take all the fun out of this. |
Diablobrian
| Posted on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 - 11:21 pm: |
|
Just trying to keep things honest..... No one that has heard your bike would buy into it "only being a 9" either. That force pipe is louder than the rhinehart/beson that is on our race bike. |
Cityxslicker
| Posted on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 - 12:38 am: |
|
even according to your own grid, you would have to be running it at 7500 RPM, My bike does NOT like to run in that are in fifth gear, give me a sixth to get the rpms down, and a LOOOOONG flat salt straight away, still only thinking that it would be more in the mid 130 range, B@llz out |
Statik
| Posted on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 - 01:56 pm: |
|
my 05 XB9sx goes 200 mph! ps: http://www.1-18-08.com/ |
Chessm
| Posted on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 - 03:42 pm: |
|
bah... i have no interest in how fast my bike can go in a straight line. now curves on the other hand... |
Barker
| Posted on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 - 05:14 pm: |
|
I dont care to go that fast either. I just want more "power" from a shorter gear ratio. Why go taller if I doesn't have the HP or aerodynamics to get there? |
Shazam
| Posted on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 - 11:48 pm: |
|
chessm, i can see your point. having 60% more horsepower wouldn't be the least bit interesting for the curves or the track..... let me just say having 117+rwhp in an XB chassis is a wild ride...and I personally can't wait to flog the new "R" some of you understand, some of you don't, and some of you.... will... |
Diablobrian
| Posted on Thursday, July 12, 2007 - 12:42 am: |
|
I feel so inadequate with "only" 100 rwhp now Maybe I should ditch the stock cams in favor of something hotter.... then again I'm pretty happy as is. |
Chessm
| Posted on Thursday, July 12, 2007 - 01:57 pm: |
|
chessm, i can see your point. having 60% more horsepower wouldn't be the least bit interesting for the curves or the track..... let me just say having 117+rwhp in an XB chassis is a wild ride...and I personally can't wait to flog the new "R" some of you understand, some of you don't, and some of you.... will... youre telling me the 08 xb9sx has 117+rwhp? wow! im putting my 04 up for sale now! |
Hogs
| Posted on Thursday, July 12, 2007 - 02:20 pm: |
|
Chessm, I`m with ya Heck I`m putting the 4 of my xbs up for sale NOW...!!! |
Xb12rdude
| Posted on Thursday, July 12, 2007 - 02:29 pm: |
|
All I know is that my 12r redlines at 142mph, that's when my ricer buddys on their liter bikes pass me, but not any more. Hello to 1125R baby.............. Legal Notice: of course that was in an enclosed compound with all proper permits and performed by a professional driver. |
Gentleman_jon
| Posted on Thursday, July 12, 2007 - 02:49 pm: |
|
Very interesting post, as always, Barker. I was just wondering what you used for air resistance for the Buell in free fall. Unless you could have it in a head first attitude, you might need a bit more altitude! Or were you planning on riding it down yourself?
|
Barker
| Posted on Thursday, July 12, 2007 - 03:41 pm: |
|
I guessed on drag coefficient. and 420lbs (wet bike) I should have asked one of my riding buddies, Dr. Huddleston, He has PhD in physics. Sending email to the good doctor right now. |