Author |
Message |
Dave_bogue
| Posted on Monday, July 16, 2007 - 04:56 pm: |
|
What are the RWHP horsepower and torque figures on a Dynojet? Thanks, Dave |
Anonymous
| Posted on Monday, July 16, 2007 - 05:31 pm: |
|
High 130s, torque offset matches. |
Wademan
| Posted on Monday, July 16, 2007 - 05:43 pm: |
|
6-7% driveline losses. Not bad. Amazing really. |
Dave_bogue
| Posted on Monday, July 16, 2007 - 06:08 pm: |
|
Frankly, I am skeptical, but I want to believe! My naked SV1000 makes about 110 RWHP and is the most fun bike I've ever owned. I want another V2 sportbike and the 1125R specs are just what I'm looking for: the everyman's 1098 at $3000 less. Oh, and could I have that with handlebars please? Dave Bradenton Florida 2003 SV1000 2006 ZX-10R |
Anonymous
| Posted on Monday, July 16, 2007 - 06:19 pm: |
|
Don't be skeptical, this bike delivers. We really, really worked hard on it. Same exact weight as a 1098, with a few less horsepower, but with lower maintenance costs, more comfort, and a much wider powerband. Ducatis are very nice, and have their own charisma,but the 1125R really is an excellent motorcycle by any standards. It will make you proud to own one. And yes, they come with handlebars, passenger pegs and all you need! |
Ratbuell
| Posted on Monday, July 16, 2007 - 11:12 pm: |
|
6-7%? HOLY CRAP. That's amazing. Nice work guys! |
Sarodude
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 12:04 pm: |
|
At a 7% driveline loss, isn't this basically redefining what is commercially possible WRT motorcycle driveline efficiency? Everyone seems to take 15% as essentially a given. This is cool stuff. -Saro |
Srtm4
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 12:41 pm: |
|
Maybe the motor is making a little more than 146 at the crank!!!!??? |
Lake_bueller
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 01:40 pm: |
|
Aren't the current XB models about the same in regards to percentage of loss? Maybe the belt/tensioner combo is the key to the efficiency. |
Sarodude
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 01:41 pm: |
|
I just realized - we're not just comparing crank vs wheel - we're comparing different dyno manufacturers and probably different types of dynos. Regardless - a Dynojet buck thirty something at the wheel is what many have been waiting for and it is cool! -Saro |
Anonymous
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 03:53 pm: |
|
Hmmm, maybe so Srtm4, maybe so. |
Srtm4
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 04:01 pm: |
|
I had a hunch thats what was going on! Nothing wrong with underestimating a little! This bike is going to impress! |
Srtm4
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 04:27 pm: |
|
If you were to use the normal 15% drivetrain loss then this new Rotax motor would be making closer to 160 at the crank. Im thinking that this may be a bit high and that Buells drivetrain loss is a bit more effecient. I do think this engine could be making over 150 hp. Very impressive with such a flat torque curve. I think that our ship has come in! |
Aeholton
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 05:23 pm: |
|
Nothing wrong with underestimating a little! I have never seen a factory underestimate HP figures. If anything they are usually 10%+ optimistic. |
Davegess
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 05:33 pm: |
|
have never seen a factory underestimate HP figures. Different in every sense? |
Fresnobuell
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 06:06 pm: |
|
Yeah, how blown away would the motorcycle world be if the 1125r surpassed the factory figures? That would be cool. |
Paintballtommy
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 06:07 pm: |
|
late 60's early 70s ford and gm underrated their engines for insurance purposes... |
Garrett2
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 06:12 pm: |
|
many cars are underrated, itd be nothing new |
Buellshyter
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 06:50 pm: |
|
many cars are underrated, itd be nothing new That's funny - underestimate the hp and overestimate the gas mileage |
Elvis
| Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 08:13 pm: |
|
Yeah, how blown away would the motorcycle world be if the 1125r surpassed the factory figures? That would be cool. I have feeling that the spec sheet (as impressive as it is) doesn't begin to show the strengths of this bike. The more we hear, the more it's clear that this is a bike built by riders for riders with attention to all the little details that aren't necessary . . . but sure do make a long day of riding a better experience. While other manufacturers seem fixated on pushing the redline into regions no one will ever use, creating bumps at the top end so they can claim 2 extra HP, and making sure their bike will look good sitting in the parking lot of the local hangout, Buell is working on the things other mfgrs don't seem to think their customers care about . . . and maybe most of their customers don't. Let's see a show of hands from those who put more than 2000 miles per year on your bike. Which will you geyt more use out of: a 15,000 rpm redline or an adjustable shift lever? (Message edited by elvis on July 17, 2007) |
Jasonk
| Posted on Wednesday, July 18, 2007 - 09:09 pm: |
|
...currently averaging 1600 miles/month...just to and from work...add in 'extra' riding, and I'm pretty close to the 2k/month...I'll take the adjusters, TYVM... |
Tpoppa
| Posted on Wednesday, July 18, 2007 - 11:48 pm: |
|
Maybe the motor is making a little more than 146 at the crank!!!!??? Hmmm, maybe so Srtm4, maybe so. Hmmm. OK then, what's the deal with posted dyno chart? Does it show actual numbers? |
Diablobrian
| Posted on Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 12:22 am: |
|
I'll bet the curve shapes are accurate, but dyno numbers will vary (as with all dyno results) I would guess that they are still tweaking and refining the ignition and fuel maps to get the most they can out of it while still passing the EPA standards. But I could be wrong... |
Kuuud
| Posted on Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 08:38 am: |
|
I would guess that they are still tweaking and refining the ignition and fuel maps to get the most they can out of it while still passing the EPA standards. But I could be wrong... +1 |
No_rice
| Posted on Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 11:45 pm: |
|
from what i have gathered in the conversations i have had, there is plenty of room for those numbers to grow also... |
Diablobrian
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 12:59 am: |
|
Especially after purchase where there is a little more latitude for adjustment without "the man" looking over our shoulders and free flowing exhausts are fitted along with opening up the intake tract, and re-mapping etc. Of course we would never violate EPA regulations |
M2nc
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 03:11 am: |
|
1098 advertises 160hp at the Crank. CycleWorld Aug 07 issue rated the 1098 at their test with 150rwhp. That is 6.25% drive line loss. (...or underrated Advertised HP, ...or prepped test bike) The 1125R at 146hp at the Crank with the same drive line loss would be just under 137rwhp. Annon's claim is totally doable. |
Chadhargis
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 12:25 pm: |
|
Ducati is also very good about putting in ECU tunes and performance exhausts on their test bikes. Smart move! |
Anonymous
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 01:48 pm: |
|
The Ducati that made 150 hp in CW's test was a 1098S ($20,000) with another $2500 of racing accessories, including a non-street-legal exhaust and EPA-violating ECU map. When CW got a standard 1098, it made 143 hp, with the 1098 standard big dip in the torque curve at 6000 rpm. We don't mind in the least being compared to the Ducati, but do make sure you're checking apples against apples. |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 04:11 pm: |
|
And was it just me? When the 1098 was announced, the implication seemed to be that it would be a $10,000 bike making 170 HP at the crank. Then it was $12,000, and 150HP. Except that it was $17,000... and by the way would only do it with a bunch of "race only" parts. It started as the "R1 Killer" and ended up as a pretty darn nice Ducatti. Nothing wrong with that, but "what I heard" ended up to be incredibly different then what played out. I betcha that won't be the case with the 1124r... and in fact the inverse will be true. The level of honesty and transparency in everything I have head said by Buell with regards to the 1125r has been a jaw droppingly and breathtakingly wonderful thing to witness, and makes me prouder to ride a Buell then ever. (Message edited by reepicheep on July 20, 2007) |
M1combat
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 04:17 pm: |
|
"with the 1124r" Gohh... Buell Bashers everywhere... J/K Reep ;). |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 05:35 pm: |
|
Missed it by *that* much |
Dave_bogue
| Posted on Thursday, December 20, 2007 - 09:39 am: |
|
Spike writes: "A local dealer dynoed their 1125R after the break-in was finished (~700 miles on the bike) and it put 128hp and 73ft-lbs to the rear wheel. Dyno results vary from one dyno to the next (and even day to day), but this same dyno said my stock '04 XB12R with ~1000 miles on it had 89.x rwhp. TC88 bikes usually end up in the mid-60rwhp range on this dyno." --------------------------------- The 128 RWHP & 73 Footpound numbers sound more realistic to me based on Buell's claim of 146 at the crank. Another example: Yamaha claimed 150 crank HP for the 2nd Gen FZ-1. Most dyno runs are in the low 130s. As new owners get the engines broken in and on the dyno, we will be able to average out the numbers. Surely there will be a nice additional gain with Power Commander and exhaust mods. Hopefully Buell will offer alternative pulleys to change the gearing for those so inclined. Dave Bradenton Florida |