Must admit: curious to see who wins the 1000/600 cc comparos

[CNF2002]

Yes, the new bikes are better. But the differences can be very small. It might surprise many of you just how competent some of the older bikes were.

i have no doubts that older bikes can be competent.

im just saying... i think the gixxer would have done better than a 1½ sec lead if given to a rider that can handle the bike better.

I could use the same argument that if the guy on the other bike was a better rider, he would have beaten the gixxer.

It doesnt change the fact that my bike would have won though.

[Kal]

Kev Smith has actually tested the Gixxer thou in a number of head to heads, he can certainly ride better than most other riders.

My favorite being the sports car ones. While I was looking up his bio I did realise it was a wasdte of tiem, it'll be argued with regardless.

However this thread is continuing to really, really underline my point.

There is no absolute best - Best is a relative concept

[Skier]

Verm, unless you've moved to Canada,

STOP LEACHING PEOPLE'S BANDWIDTH.

[VermilionX]

sev,

the 150 i mentioned is the bhp.

it puts out 115-130whp depending on how, when, where it is dyno'ed.

bhp specs are the ones most referred to. so it's easier to use it as a guideline.

just like when you guys recommend around 50hp for newbies. you guys are recommending 50bhp and not 50whp.

[Sev]

sev,

the 150 i mentioned is the bhp.

it puts out 115-130whp depending on how, when, where it is dyno'ed.

bhp specs are the ones most referred to. so it's easier to use it as a guideline.

just like when you guys recommend around 50hp for newbies. you guys are recommending 50bhp and not 50whp.

Thankyou for poorly re-explaining what I already said.

Don't forget that it varies from bike to bike, and upon how it was broken in.

All of that being said, it's the bhp that manufacturers release. Which is ALWAYS an optimisitic number, usually based upon the best engine they can produce.

Remember, manufacturers lie. Wasn't there something about one of Kawasaki's bikes revving to 17000rpm? Which was then retracted when it was proved that it didn't hit that high. Yes I know that's not your bike or manufacturer, but the point still stands.

Once again, what did your bike dyno at? Do I need to go back and find it myself?

[VermilionX]

Once again, what did your bike dyno at? Do I need to go back and find it myself?

it dyno'ed at 112.

so it's normal based on the ranges of 115-130whp that others are getting.

the guys that dyno'ed it said its normal under the circumstances it was dyno'ed. it was very hot that day and it was dyno'ed outside.

they said if they did it in their official shop... it will produce higher numbers. they just made a tent in the county fair that i went.


again, it just depends on how, when, where it was dyno'ed.



also... i think it was a rip-off like another rider who talked ot me after my run. they didn't even give me a torque rating and they didn't simulate the ram air intake of my bike.

but i guess i can't really expect much for $20 dyno run at a local fair.





besides... why are you taking it at personal level?

im arguing the bikes in general and not my bike and some other guy's bike.

[Sev]

So... somewhere between the crank and wheel you lost 38hp? That's 25% of claimed power production.

A chain final drive is supposed to lose somewhere between 1% and 3%, belt is 2% to 4% and a shaft is up to 10%.

So, even if you wanted to say it's warmer, and it wasn't getting the full effects of the ram air system, that still seems like an awful big power loss... sort of makes you wonder where the rest of that claimed 150 went?

[VermilionX]

So... somewhere between the crank and wheel you lost 38hp? That's 25% of claimed power production.

A chain final drive is supposed to lose somewhere between 1% and 3%, belt is 2% to 4% and a shaft is up to 10%.

So, even if you wanted to say it's warmer, and it wasn't getting the full effects of the ram air system, that still seems like an awful big power loss... sort of makes you wonder where the rest of that claimed 150 went?

it just depends on the consditions of the dyno run.

im sure if test it on several dynoes... i can find one that it will show somewhere around area of 130whp.

13% hp loss bec of final drive seems normal isn't it?

but would i really bother having it dyno'ed all over the place just to see a 130whp run? not really.

i already know my bike is in the normal range eventhough it's just from a $20 county fair bargain bin dyno run.


i got a new pipe though, maybe i'll dyno it to check if im running lean or rich. i'll take it to a real dyno place though this time around.



also... again... no need to put this in a personal level. we're arguing the bike models in general. not the ones owned by specific people.

[Sev]

Unfortunately I need to make specific examples so that you understand a general concept.

It is only an argument of which bike is better because you had the balls to say, "mine is better because it makes more hp." You might as well have said, "mine is better because it's purple." You take a single fact, and one that is open to interpretation (and has already been proved false) and hold it up like gospel to say that you are correct.

[VermilionX]

Unfortunately I need to make specific examples so that you understand a general concept.

It is only an argument of which bike is better because you had the balls to say, "mine is better because it makes more hp." You might as well have said, "mine is better because it's purple." You take a single fact, and one that is open to interpretation (and has already been proved false) and hold it up like gospel to say that you are correct.

what was proven false again?

bec you can't be talking about the gixxer750 K6 having higher hp being as false.

i don't like using dyno charts bec there are too many variables. so i just like using bhp ratings.



but anyway... let's see some dyno charts on the 675.

here's one from a gixxer750 K6 from dynomec.com