Which color is really faster???
07-03-2010 | 06:14 PM
#61
Senior Member
Superstock
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 338
From: Colorado
Hell yeah we are comparing our bikes to supercars! I dont know about you but thats who I plan on racing stoplight to stop light. For us that don't get paid 7 figures a bike is our only option for that kind of speed. I used to rent cars to all of those rich, stuck up Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes and Audi drivers that thought their cars were the ****. Now when I pull away from them you know they are in the car talking to themselves, trying to build their ego back up and trying to justify the fact that they just got their *** kicked by a cheap motorcycle. I bet it sounds something like this "Well at least my car has heated seats!" "Well at least I can carry luggage in my car"
07-06-2010 | 05:58 PM
#62
Senior Member
MotoGP
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,451
From: San Clemente, CA
Okay, 60 to 80 roll on test...
I rode today for the 1st time in 2 weeks, having had knee surgery on 6/23. I felt pretty good in riding position, so I thought I'd check 60 to 80, 6th gear roll on. There's a level road just 3 miles away with nobody on it. So I checked it riding in both directions (twice) while counting the seconds in my head (not scientific, I know, but I think I'm pretty good at this).
What I came up with is not more than 3 seconds all 4 times. And I might add that I think I still may need about .010" needle shim. So either the guy that got 5 seconds was 300+ pounds, or that was one sick Hawk. My bike is an '05 with stock gearing and air filter, Yoshimura titanium slip-ons, 48 pilots and .020" needle shim, and 40,000 miles on the clock. I weigh 155.
I rode today for the 1st time in 2 weeks, having had knee surgery on 6/23. I felt pretty good in riding position, so I thought I'd check 60 to 80, 6th gear roll on. There's a level road just 3 miles away with nobody on it. So I checked it riding in both directions (twice) while counting the seconds in my head (not scientific, I know, but I think I'm pretty good at this).
What I came up with is not more than 3 seconds all 4 times. And I might add that I think I still may need about .010" needle shim. So either the guy that got 5 seconds was 300+ pounds, or that was one sick Hawk. My bike is an '05 with stock gearing and air filter, Yoshimura titanium slip-ons, 48 pilots and .020" needle shim, and 40,000 miles on the clock. I weigh 155.
07-06-2010 | 07:46 PM
#63
Thread Starter
Banned
MotoGP
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,942
From: Lake View Terrace, CA
Well don't take any of this the wrong way but did you first take into account the stock speedo error? So if you just went by and indicated 60-80 you are using different parameters than the original test.
Second (once again don't take this the wrong way) don't you believe you would be just a bit biased in you test result? I mean if you really wanted to do a test like this, you would need to find a third party to ride the bike that did not have any idea or preconceptions on what the outcome could or should be.
Third, your bike is not stock (as you have slip ons and carb work) that would also change the out come of the test.
So the outcome of your impromptu test is inconclusive at best.
Second (once again don't take this the wrong way) don't you believe you would be just a bit biased in you test result? I mean if you really wanted to do a test like this, you would need to find a third party to ride the bike that did not have any idea or preconceptions on what the outcome could or should be.
Third, your bike is not stock (as you have slip ons and carb work) that would also change the out come of the test.
So the outcome of your impromptu test is inconclusive at best.
07-06-2010 | 07:53 PM
#64
Senior Member
MotoGP
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,451
From: San Clemente, CA
If I took speedo error into account (approx 5 mph, I figure), I would have been starting the roll on at 65, which in my estimation would have shortened the roll on time.
And yes, I'm well aware of my seat of the pants test, but I counted 1 one thousand, 2 one thousand, 3 one thousand. So I think I was pretty close.
And there's no way my bike was 2 seconds slower 4 months ago, before the slip-ons, or one year ago, before the needle shim.
And yes, I'm well aware of my seat of the pants test, but I counted 1 one thousand, 2 one thousand, 3 one thousand. So I think I was pretty close.
And there's no way my bike was 2 seconds slower 4 months ago, before the slip-ons, or one year ago, before the needle shim.
07-06-2010 | 10:39 PM
#65
Senior Member
MotoGP
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,451
From: San Clemente, CA
07-06-2010 | 11:24 PM
#66
Senior Member
MotoGP
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,451
From: San Clemente, CA
I think they should all get Rickey Gadson to do their 1/4 mile runs. That way it would be consistent, and probably the best time possible.
And yeah, I have no idea how they do their roll ons accurate to 1/100 of a second.
And yeah, I have no idea how they do their roll ons accurate to 1/100 of a second.
07-06-2010 | 11:29 PM
#67
Thread Starter
Banned
MotoGP
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,942
From: Lake View Terrace, CA
Well another piece of the puzzle is that in '01, when they changed the ECU they added more advance. That is why the Factory ignition advancer doesn't have the same affect as it does on the older models.
Why would they do this? Maybe because the bike doesn't have as much cam so the got a little back by running more advance.
So it would appear the slowest year would be '00 as it still had the older ECU. The later years got a little back with the newer ECU.
Even with that, it would appear (by use logic and not getting emotional about this) that there is a power gain to be had by running the earlier cams.
Sorry if this is offensive to some but the whole point of the thread has been to try and figure out what happened to the HP that was lost starting in '00
Why would they do this? Maybe because the bike doesn't have as much cam so the got a little back by running more advance.
So it would appear the slowest year would be '00 as it still had the older ECU. The later years got a little back with the newer ECU.
Even with that, it would appear (by use logic and not getting emotional about this) that there is a power gain to be had by running the earlier cams.
Sorry if this is offensive to some but the whole point of the thread has been to try and figure out what happened to the HP that was lost starting in '00
07-07-2010 | 12:13 AM
#68
Senior Member
MotoGP
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,451
From: San Clemente, CA
No offense taken. Changing the cam grind would affect Nox and HC emissions. Increased spark advance will increase Nox and HC as well. More strict emission controls would be a logical reason to make mods that reduce performance. In the '70s spark advance was reduced and initial timing was retarded to ridiculous levels on some cars to meet emission requirements. Valve overlap was first reduced in the late '60s, then increased when it was discovered that too little overlap (which reduced HC) increased Nox. EFI and computer controls changed all that.
Regardless, all I know is that I twist the throttle, and my bike responds. With the VTR it's all about the visceral experience. I've never ridden another bike that was more all around fun to ride.
An accurate measurement and comparison of camshaft lift and duration, as well as valve timing would certainly be interesting.
Regardless, all I know is that I twist the throttle, and my bike responds. With the VTR it's all about the visceral experience. I've never ridden another bike that was more all around fun to ride.
An accurate measurement and comparison of camshaft lift and duration, as well as valve timing would certainly be interesting.
07-07-2010 | 12:16 AM
#69
Thread Starter
Banned
MotoGP
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,942
From: Lake View Terrace, CA
Well I was just making sure as that wasn't the point of this thread...... Maybe it's just my bike has been down for close to 3 months now and I'm going a bit stir crazy......lol but I would be very interested in see the numbers from the cams 
Back to sending out even more damn resumes.....
Back to sending out even more damn resumes.....
07-07-2010 | 12:29 AM
#70
Senior Member
MotoGP
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,451
From: San Clemente, CA
I hear you. I was going nuts waiting for my bike to get repaired after getting rear ended, that was 9 weeks. Then a month later I had knee surgery, that was 2 weeks ago. This afternoon I told my wife I was going for a 5 to 10 minute ride to see how my knee worked while riding. About 40 minutes later I got home.
Hope you get your bike and body back together soon.
Hope you get your bike and body back together soon.
07-07-2010 | 02:23 AM
#71
Senior Member
SuperSport
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 667
From: NY State
Funny how that works, I say that I will be back in 1/2 hour, my wife (who really is the greatest) assumes that means 1 1/2 hour, which it does.
07-07-2010 | 12:57 PM
#72
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,109
From: Skurup, Sweden
Ok... I'm not going to claim "accurate" numbers since my measuring was a bit dodgy... But I can say for 101% sure that the lift and duration is different, and the cam lobes are in a different place... How much and actual numbers is not something I'll post until I can re-measure with better tools (unnamed family members had walked of with some tools and have now been reminded to return them post haste, or there will be consequences... Like me raiding their garage and beer storage at various intervalls...)
But even without very accurate numbers, I can confirm that there is a difference, and it's probably bigger than high spec to low spec... I kind of doubt that they would change the lobe's unless they had a reason for it...
Like me raiding their garage and beer storage at various intervalls...)But even without very accurate numbers, I can confirm that there is a difference, and it's probably bigger than high spec to low spec... I kind of doubt that they would change the lobe's unless they had a reason for it...
07-07-2010 | 01:15 PM
#73
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,109
From: Skurup, Sweden
97 & 03... One is the cam replaced in my now running 97 when I started playing... The other is the one I replaced in the "new" donor engine that's going to get a lot more fun stuff asap...
But right now it looks like it might become a track VTR instead... Dunno... Right now I have to damned many bikes and parts of bikes to know what to do with...
But right now it looks like it might become a track VTR instead... Dunno... Right now I have to damned many bikes and parts of bikes to know what to do with...
07-07-2010 | 02:48 PM
#75
Thread Starter
Banned
MotoGP
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,942
From: Lake View Terrace, CA
07-07-2010 | 03:27 PM
#76
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,109
From: Skurup, Sweden
Yeah, I measured both sets, ie checked front and rear against each others, and the same difference is there... It's really small, but it's there...
Also lift & duration is larger on the 97 set...
Also lift & duration is larger on the 97 set...
07-07-2010 | 03:27 PM
#77
Thread Starter
Banned
MotoGP
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,942
From: Lake View Terrace, CA
Well I do have an inside line to them that I will try to use, One of my local forum members is now one of their writers, so I will shoot him a quick message and see if I get an answer (he doesn't log in all that often anymore, so it might take a little while to hear back)
07-07-2010 | 03:34 PM
#78
Senior Member
MotoGP
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,451
From: San Clemente, CA
However on DOHC, I'm with you RK.
07-07-2010 | 04:25 PM
#79
Thread Starter
Banned
MotoGP
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,942
From: Lake View Terrace, CA
I got a reply from Ari Henning a little while ago. Says roll ons are recorded on a closed course with a radar gun and dedicated computer program. Didn't mention if they did it that way 10 years ago. I don't think anyone there now was there then. Said he didn't know what to make of the posted 60-80 numbers but would look into it.
07-08-2010 | 01:11 AM
#81
Thread Starter
Banned
MotoGP
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,942
From: Lake View Terrace, CA
http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/mo...150/index.html
http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/mo...175/index.html
07-08-2010 | 06:32 PM
#83
Senior Member
MotoGP
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,451
From: San Clemente, CA
I just watched that first video. Wow, that was some duke out. Roper on the "Harley" shut the door rather nastily on Henning on at least 3 occasions in right handers that I noticed. And I agree, Ari Henning has been a great addition to Motorcyclist.
07-08-2010 | 06:58 PM
#84
Senior Member
Superstock
Superstock
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 293
Also, as I saw it mentioned a few days ago, the '97 TL-S definitely was significantly stronger than the later TL-S. Not sure the differences, as my memory is *****... but I had a '97 TL-S for a few years. I think they mellowed the tuning slightly when the TL-R came out. I've ridden later TL-S's as well, and there was a noticeable difference. (Worked at a Suzuki dealer for a few years).
Changing tuning for the arrival of the RC-51 would certainly make sense, and I'm glad Tweety took the time to measure the cams. Still, 5 second roll on's seems crazy. Could be the cam timing, combined with carbs tuned for every tightening emissions could find the motor in a "hole" in stock form right at that rpm range. This would be further exacerbated by the too-tall stock gearing, keeping it from pulling with the authority that a properly jetted, but otherwise stock bike would.
-R
Changing tuning for the arrival of the RC-51 would certainly make sense, and I'm glad Tweety took the time to measure the cams. Still, 5 second roll on's seems crazy. Could be the cam timing, combined with carbs tuned for every tightening emissions could find the motor in a "hole" in stock form right at that rpm range. This would be further exacerbated by the too-tall stock gearing, keeping it from pulling with the authority that a properly jetted, but otherwise stock bike would.
-R
07-09-2010 | 09:22 AM
#85
Remember stock is BAD!
SuperSport
SuperSport
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 760
From: Jacksonville FL
07-14-2010 | 07:54 PM
#86
Seņor Miembro, Ay Caramba
SuperSport
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 562
From: a little north of DC
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
