DYNO Numbers for Baggers???
#791
#793
RE: DYNO Numbers for Baggers???
I understand all the talk about mods (and what not)......I love power. I have, in my shed, a 400 cc dirtbike that makes close to 50 hp....this bike weighs 252 lbs.When it comes toHP/Weight ratios a dirt bike will win over any other type of motorcycle. The bikeswe are talking aboutare bagger's. As boat owners will attest, the RPM range that a motor operates in will have a HUGE affect on fuel economy. Bagger's are designed for fuel range...not power. I would love to have a 95hp touring bike that gets 55 mpg....let me know when you find it....Otherwise..get a crotch rocket. btw...IF...IF you find a way to get high mileage, and high power,.....PLEASE let me know..I will gladly eat crow..
#794
RE: DYNO Numbers for Baggers???
I just got my scooter back from the dyno so I though I'd post my sheet.
I didn't expect a huge gain from the dyno - just a confirmation that all is well. I had done a seat of the pants dyno after I installed the slipons, duals and intake(represented in theBaseline dyno run) so the small gain in HP and TQ is the results of tweaking it on the dyno.
I wish I haddyno'd before I started so I could have a before/after comparison, but I'm sure someone can post their info - mine would have been close. Anyone?
BTW, the bike was dyno'd in Calgary, which from an elevation perspective is rather high. Elevation has a significant affect on the maximum horsepower that can be achieved, so I was curious if dyno results are compensated for elevation? I doubt it, but thought I would ask.
Interesting to note, the torque numbers start high and stay high up to ~4000 rpm. There has been much debate/discussion regarding the loss of low-end torque with true duals. I'm happy with the flat torque curve. Note - I'm not trying to stir it up, it's just an observation.
[IMG]local://upfiles/56807/E6D5F27DAB274C3BB7C19715E1FEB24D.jpg[/IMG]
I didn't expect a huge gain from the dyno - just a confirmation that all is well. I had done a seat of the pants dyno after I installed the slipons, duals and intake(represented in theBaseline dyno run) so the small gain in HP and TQ is the results of tweaking it on the dyno.
I wish I haddyno'd before I started so I could have a before/after comparison, but I'm sure someone can post their info - mine would have been close. Anyone?
BTW, the bike was dyno'd in Calgary, which from an elevation perspective is rather high. Elevation has a significant affect on the maximum horsepower that can be achieved, so I was curious if dyno results are compensated for elevation? I doubt it, but thought I would ask.
Interesting to note, the torque numbers start high and stay high up to ~4000 rpm. There has been much debate/discussion regarding the loss of low-end torque with true duals. I'm happy with the flat torque curve. Note - I'm not trying to stir it up, it's just an observation.
[IMG]local://upfiles/56807/E6D5F27DAB274C3BB7C19715E1FEB24D.jpg[/IMG]
#795
#798
#799
RE: DYNO Numbers for Baggers???
2008 RK Classic
SE Stage 1 Intake
Rinehart True Duals
82ft/lbs. @3800 rpms
70 H.P. @4700 rpms
(78*, 29.32 in-hg & 22% humidity)
Was expecting a little more especially for the cost...anyone know what the stock 2008 96ci motor is rated at @ the rear wheel??? Or better yet, has anyone dynoed their stock '08 96" bike???
SE Stage 1 Intake
Rinehart True Duals
82ft/lbs. @3800 rpms
70 H.P. @4700 rpms
(78*, 29.32 in-hg & 22% humidity)
Was expecting a little more especially for the cost...anyone know what the stock 2008 96ci motor is rated at @ the rear wheel??? Or better yet, has anyone dynoed their stock '08 96" bike???