My R1 is better than your R1 - Yamaha R1 Forum: YZF-R1 Forums

Yamaha YZF-R1 - R1M General Discussion General discussion area specific to the 2015 Yamaha R1M model. Please post all YZF-R1 R1M related topics in this section.

 9Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-06-2016, 05:07 AM Thread Starter
Gian11
 
gsa013's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,156
Garage
My R1 is better than your R1

this bike is all titanium and magnesium.. to put on a steel exhaust is a waste IMO. The benefit from an exhaust power wise is minimal on this bike.. the benefit on weight savings(specially from titanium) are huge... braking, handling, acceleration.. etc.

If I had an R1S.. I´d rapidly go to ebay and buy a used R1 OEM titanium header and then pick up any titanium linkpipe/exhaust of my liking.
gsa013 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-07-2016, 01:32 PM
I eat my R1
 
yamaharandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,768
My R1 is better than your R1

Quote:
Originally Posted by gsa013 View Post
this bike is all titanium and magnesium.. to put on a steel exhaust is a waste IMO. The benefit from an exhaust power wise is minimal on this bike.. the benefit on weight savings(specially from titanium) are huge... braking, handling, acceleration.. etc.

If I had an R1S.. I´d rapidly go to ebay and buy a used R1 OEM titanium header and then pick up any titanium linkpipe/exhaust of my liking.
not all of hindles options are steel. the $500 one is. but it's still a lot lighter than the stock converter.

and it was already proven that the R1M isn't any faster than the R1s. it was beat in every category by the R1s.
2016 Yamaha YZF-R1M vs. YZF-R1S Sportbike COMPARISON TEST | Cycle World


all this ti stuff on the r1 and r1m means nothing to regular joes like most of us are.
yamaharandy is offline  
post #3 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-07-2016, 03:17 PM Thread Starter
Gian11
 
gsa013's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,156
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by yamaharandy View Post
not all of hindles options are steel. the $500 one is. but it's still a lot lighter than the stock converter.

and it was already proven that the R1M isn't any faster than the R1s. it was beat in every category by the R1s.
2016 Yamaha YZF-R1M vs. YZF-R1S Sportbike COMPARISON TEST | Cycle World


all this ti stuff on the r1 and r1m means nothing to regular joes like most of us are.
I´m sure there are titanium options from hindle.. but I wasn´t referring to that exhaust alone. Plus IMO.. I´d rather have as much less weight as possible on my bike specially since I´m only riding at the track now.

And about that article... I´m sure statistically speaking one test from one magazine means that it is a fact...
gsa013 is online now  
 
post #4 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-07-2016, 07:04 PM
The R1S Guy!
 
Nya`'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by yamaharandy View Post
not all of hindles options are steel. the $500 one is. but it's still a lot lighter than the stock converter.

and it was already proven that the R1M isn't any faster than the R1s. it was beat in every category by the R1s.
2016 Yamaha YZF-R1M vs. YZF-R1S Sportbike COMPARISON TEST | Cycle World


all this ti stuff on the r1 and r1m means nothing to regular joes like most of us are.
After reading this I am even more satisfied with my R1S purchase, it's quite astonishing how people have tried to devalue this bike for me in comparison to the R1 and R1M yet in the face of tests like the above I would expect a lot of eaten crow.

After looking at all of this the R1S, a $14,990 bike seems to put up nearly identical track performance as a bike that is $8,000 more expensive, I don't know about you but color me impressed. Obviously it doesn't come with all the bells and whistles, but in terms of capabilities it seems to be on the near identical level in terms of actual results.
Nya` is offline  
post #5 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-07-2016, 07:24 PM
I eat my R1
 
///3oris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: CT
Posts: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nya` View Post
I got my Hindle 3/4 and my Austin Racing belly plate installed, it all turned out great, this really is a nice exhaust for the price.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T52p-51LFbE
Glad you like the pipe...

Quote:
Originally Posted by gsa013 View Post
this bike is all titanium and magnesium.. to put on a steel exhaust is a waste IMO. The benefit from an exhaust power wise is minimal on this bike.. the benefit on weight savings(specially from titanium) are huge... braking, handling, acceleration.. etc.

If I had an R1S.. I´d rapidly go to ebay and buy a used R1 OEM titanium header and then pick up any titanium linkpipe/exhaust of my liking.
I posted weights of my Hindle exhaust online, it was within 0.5lbs of the Graves. Mine weighted in at 4lbs 12oz... Graves is advertised as 4 lbs 6.5oz

Weight info & pictures, just 'cuz I'm too lazy to repost: Band Of Riders - View Single Post - 2015 Yamaha R1 Track Prep (+ Weight info)

Quote:
Originally Posted by yamaharandy View Post
not all of hindles options are steel. the $500 one is. but it's still a lot lighter than the stock converter.

and it was already proven that the R1M isn't any faster than the R1s. it was beat in every category by the R1s.
2016 Yamaha YZF-R1M vs. YZF-R1S Sportbike COMPARISON TEST | Cycle World


all this ti stuff on the r1 and r1m means nothing to regular joes like most of us are.
Read the article this morning and disagree with it. I mean, don't get me wrong, the R1S and R1M are meant for different customers entirely, however the shootout was performed on stock bikes with stock maps.

The R1/R1M engine is detuned from the factory due to EPA. So really they're close because the R1 can't use all its power and that extra over-rev is just that...

Uncork the R1 and run the test again.

Will that extra 2k matter to most people in the real world? Meh, probably not... but the shootout was compromised from the beginning and of course, they're comparing to the R1M, not even the R1, which is better priced and doesn't include the things most people don't 'need.'

2015 R1 Track Toy (
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
)


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
///3oris is offline  
post #6 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-07-2016, 10:52 PM
The R1S Guy!
 
Nya`'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by ///3oris View Post
Read the article this morning and disagree with it. I mean, don't get me wrong, the R1S and R1M are meant for different customers entirely, however the shootout was performed on stock bikes with stock maps.

The R1/R1M engine is detuned from the factory due to EPA. So really they're close because the R1 can't use all its power and that extra over-rev is just that...

Uncork the R1 and run the test again.

Will that extra 2k matter to most people in the real world? Meh, probably not... but the shootout was compromised from the beginning and of course, they're comparing to the R1M, not even the R1, which is better priced and doesn't include the things most people don't 'need.'
The bikes suffer from the same ECU restrictions, meaning if they were unrestricted the results would still be identical to what they are now (albeit faster) due to the same ability to tune them.

I don't know the exact gains but let's say the HP gain is +18 and the torque increase is +5, that would add +18 and +5 to both bikes, so the difference between them would be what it is currently, just at a higher HP/torque rating.

In a nutshell, the results on a track between these two bikes are negligible and in reality almost identical, and with an unrestricted ECU this would continue to be the case.

Last edited by Nya`; 07-07-2016 at 10:57 PM.
Nya` is offline  
post #7 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 09:40 AM
I eat my R1
 
Munkyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: NYC
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nya` View Post
The bikes suffer from the same ECU restrictions, meaning if they were unrestricted the results would still be identical to what they are now (albeit faster) due to the same ability to tune them.

I don't know the exact gains but let's say the HP gain is +18 and the torque increase is +5, that would add +18 and +5 to both bikes, so the difference between them would be what it is currently, just at a higher HP/torque rating.

In a nutshell, the results on a track between these two bikes are negligible and in reality almost identical, and with an unrestricted ECU this would continue to be the case.
I Disagree with this.

Again, the major differences between the R1s and the R1/R1M are internals.

Just the fact that the redline is lowered based on them not including the same spec valve springs alone would be a performance reduction when trying to push the R1s on a dyno. Since Yamaha themselves has not confirmed if they have went with standard springs or kept the titanium springs at a lower spring rate, I cannot confirm or deny the material difference, however if it has a lower redline I know for sure that its a lower spring rate.

In the motorsport industry replacing the valve springs on the valve train to stiffer titanium springs not only allows the valve train to revolve at a higher speed without suffering from valve float issues (where the valve stays open when it should be shut... IE the compression cycle, or the combustion cycle), but saves on weight on moving part in the engine as well as resists heat deformation at higher RPM's.

Next thing it does not have is the Fracture split Titanium connecting rods.. Again reducing the mass on rotational energy on the cranks shaft.
Yamaha?s Fracture-Split Titanium Connecting Rods Explained | Cycle World

Any energy that the engine needs to work harder at, results in an overall power loss for the same output of another engine with similar components albeit lighter in weight. Which in turn means higher power output over the engine with the not so light components vs the engine with the ligher components. No one can argue this point... Its motor sport fact.

This dyno difference shows the taper off of power where on the R1s it takes a dive. the same would apply if you dyno tune it. As the lower revving capabilities would not allow it to gain PEAK power, which is where most of the power is made on our bikes:



Once someone does a Dyno of a R1S and an R1 with the FTECH Graves flash and similar setup, I gaurantee you that it will show the R1S has a lower power output.

Again dont get me wrong. I am in no way shitting on the R1S, it is still a very capable bike. And if I was pressed for the cash and wanted a super bike on a budget, I would go that route.

But starting with good internal parts, ends with good performance results...
Munkyy is offline  
post #8 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 11:01 AM
I eat my R1
 
gkamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 544
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munkyy View Post
I Disagree with this.

Again, the major differences between the R1s and the R1/R1M are internals.

Just the fact that the redline is lowered based on them not including the same spec valve springs alone would be a performance reduction when trying to push the R1s on a dyno. Since Yamaha themselves has not confirmed if they have went with standard springs or kept the titanium springs at a lower spring rate, I cannot confirm or deny the material difference, however if it has a lower redline I know for sure that its a lower spring rate.

In the motorsport industry replacing the valve springs on the valve train to stiffer titanium springs not only allows the valve train to revolve at a higher speed without suffering from valve float issues (where the valve stays open when it should be shut... IE the compression cycle, or the combustion cycle), but saves on weight on moving part in the engine as well as resists heat deformation at higher RPM's.

Next thing it does not have is the Fracture split Titanium connecting rods.. Again reducing the mass on rotational energy on the cranks shaft.
Yamaha?s Fracture-Split Titanium Connecting Rods Explained | Cycle World

Any energy that the engine needs to work harder at, results in an overall power loss for the same output of another engine with similar components albeit lighter in weight. Which in turn means higher power output over the engine with the not so light components vs the engine with the ligher components. No one can argue this point... Its motor sport fact.

This dyno difference shows the taper off of power where on the R1s it takes a dive. the same would apply if you dyno tune it. As the lower revving capabilities would not allow it to gain PEAK power, which is where most of the power is made on our bikes:



Once someone does a Dyno of a R1S and an R1 with the FTECH Graves flash and similar setup, I gaurantee you that it will show the R1S has a lower power output.

Again dont get me wrong. I am in no way shitting on the R1S, it is still a very capable bike. And if I was pressed for the cash and wanted a super bike on a budget, I would go that route.

But starting with good internal parts, ends with good performance results...
Interesting! i was looking a new R1S and at the time i was told it is exactly the same as the standard and R1M minus some extra electronics, launch control ect... didnt know they neutered the R1S that much compared to the R1... for a few thousand more id just go with the R1 standard when my insurance comes down a little lol, dont feel like forking out 4-500$ a month for full coverage on a new R1.
gkamp is offline  
post #9 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 11:04 AM
I eat my R1
 
Munkyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: NYC
Posts: 333
4-500 a month? whoah! Why so much? I pay 1300 a year for full coverage on my 2016 R1.

But I also have accident prevention, good rider, Anti Lock Brakes, Theft Recovery device and other discounts applied to my policy.

And I am with Allstate they are notorious for charging more for premiums on a whole.
Munkyy is offline  
post #10 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 11:13 AM
I eat my R1
 
gkamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 544
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munkyy View Post
4-500 a month? whoah! Why so much? I pay 1300 a year for full coverage on my 2016 R1.

But I also have accident prevention, good rider, Anti Lock Brakes, Theft Recovery device and other discounts applied to my policy.

And I am with Allstate they are notorious for charging more for premiums on a whole.
I KNOW!!! Not sure about age differences I'm almost 30, location NYC vs AZ, I've been a bad boy in the past but nothing recent or on record i don't think, maybe 1 speeding ticket, but my 35,000$ car is only like 130$ per month for full coverage. I checked EVERYWHERE about full coverage on a new R1 and yeah it was 4-500$ a month, 1000$ deductible and that is even with comprehensive taken off(low $400's), only collision. I couldn't believe it. But you go a few years older on the bike and it drops drastically. I picked up my currently troublesome 2012 R1 with only 1300 miles for 9k and it's only 160$ a month. Drop it to liability only and they all go to like 35$ a month lol. It could be NYC has a "riding season" in AZ all year is riding season and my bike is going to be my daily.
gkamp is offline  
post #11 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 03:57 PM
Build Quality Police
 
Alatalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Kalix, Sweden
Posts: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by yamaharandy View Post
it was already proven that the R1M isn't any faster than the R1s. it was beat in every category by the R1s.
You keep mentioning this in thread after thread, but I honestly struggle to understand your interpretation of this so called test.

The R1M posted the best laptime of the test, the R1M was mentioned to have "unmatched suspension ride quality" and the R1M was mentioned to NOT have an annoying rev limiter kick in way too close to the peak power rpm.

Beat in every category by the R1S...??? Yeah right...

Racing is all about
maintaining the highest possible acceleration
in the appropriate direction.

Peter G Wright, Technical Director, Lotus
Alatalo is offline  
post #12 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 04:15 PM
I eat my R1
 
yamaharandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatalo View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by yamaharandy View Post
it was already proven that the R1M isn't any faster than the R1s. it was beat in every category by the R1s.
You keep mentioning this in thread after thread, but I honestly struggle to understand your interpretation of this so called test.

The R1M posted the best laptime of the test, the R1M was mentioned to have "unmatched suspension ride quality" and the R1M was mentioned to NOT have an annoying rev limiter kick in way too close to the peak power rpm.

Beat in every category by the R1S...??? Yeah right...
Because most of you guys talk about the r1s as if its an R6 and couldnt come close to the performance levels of the almighy r1m.
Then a comparison is done and now comes all the excuses of how it wasnt a scientifically controlled test. Lol. Give it a rest already. The bike only weighs 3 lbs more and makes the same hp despite its steel rods and less rpm. And keeps pace on stock showa suspension components. The same results any of us would have on a track without a team of engineers tuning it.
Its called the real world.

Now, could the r1m's engine make more power once properly tuned. Probably. But it only going to be enough to say you win that contest. Not going to be enough for you to blow it away. Probably not even enough to notice on the track or road.

Last edited by yamaharandy; 07-08-2016 at 04:25 PM.
yamaharandy is offline  
post #13 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 04:32 PM
Build Quality Police
 
Alatalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Kalix, Sweden
Posts: 886
I am still curious how "R1S came close to the performance levels of R1M" was interpreted as "R1S beat R1M in every category" and on top of that "already proven"...

Racing is all about
maintaining the highest possible acceleration
in the appropriate direction.

Peter G Wright, Technical Director, Lotus
Alatalo is offline  
post #14 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 05:57 PM
The R1S Guy!
 
Nya`'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munkyy View Post
I Disagree with this.

Again, the major differences between the R1s and the R1/R1M are internals.

Just the fact that the redline is lowered based on them not including the same spec valve springs alone would be a performance reduction when trying to push the R1s on a dyno. Since Yamaha themselves has not confirmed if they have went with standard springs or kept the titanium springs at a lower spring rate, I cannot confirm or deny the material difference, however if it has a lower redline I know for sure that its a lower spring rate.

In the motorsport industry replacing the valve springs on the valve train to stiffer titanium springs not only allows the valve train to revolve at a higher speed without suffering from valve float issues (where the valve stays open when it should be shut... IE the compression cycle, or the combustion cycle), but saves on weight on moving part in the engine as well as resists heat deformation at higher RPM's.

Next thing it does not have is the Fracture split Titanium connecting rods.. Again reducing the mass on rotational energy on the cranks shaft.
Yamaha?s Fracture-Split Titanium Connecting Rods Explained | Cycle World

Any energy that the engine needs to work harder at, results in an overall power loss for the same output of another engine with similar components albeit lighter in weight. Which in turn means higher power output over the engine with the not so light components vs the engine with the ligher components. No one can argue this point... Its motor sport fact.

This dyno difference shows the taper off of power where on the R1s it takes a dive. the same would apply if you dyno tune it. As the lower revving capabilities would not allow it to gain PEAK power, which is where most of the power is made on our bikes:

Once someone does a Dyno of a R1S and an R1 with the FTECH Graves flash and similar setup, I gaurantee you that it will show the R1S has a lower power output.

Again dont get me wrong. I am in no way shitting on the R1S, it is still a very capable bike. And if I was pressed for the cash and wanted a super bike on a budget, I would go that route.

But starting with good internal parts, ends with good performance results...
I get what you're trying to say here but it doesn't mathematically add up, the R1S makes the same power as the R1 and R1M, it simply drops off at 12,200 RPM's instead of 14,200 RPM's, which on a stock R1 of any kind is only a few hundred or so RPM's below peak output.

So if you tune or unrestrict these bikes identically they are going to perform identically up until that 12,200 RPM's. A fully race tuned R1 hits its peak power at 13,500 or so RPM's, and peak torque at around 10,000, after that you're not gaining anything, having a higher redline after that just becomes marketing buzz. So where does that leave these bikes? In the end the difference will likely be within 4-5 or so horsepower and I can't see the torque being any different as it hits its peak 2,200 RPM's lower than the R1S' redline.







Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatalo View Post
You keep mentioning this in thread after thread, but I honestly struggle to understand your interpretation of this so called test.

The R1M posted the best laptime of the test, the R1M was mentioned to have "unmatched suspension ride quality" and the R1M was mentioned to NOT have an annoying rev limiter kick in way too close to the peak power rpm.

Beat in every category by the R1S...??? Yeah right...
The results between these two bike are so negligibly close that they could be the same bike ridden in a control test on a different day and put out the results you see here just to trick people.

Yes the R1M has more snazzy things on it and some better components that make it cost more, but when push comes to shove the best lap average is actually lower for the R1S between the two riders.


3:03.42 for the R1S, and 3:03.88 for the R1M, the R1S came back with a nearly half a second better average, that is not even an $8,000 diminishing return for the R1M, that is actually a negative return.
Nya` is offline  
post #15 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 06:21 PM
I eat my R1
 
///3oris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: CT
Posts: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nya` View Post
The bikes suffer from the same ECU restrictions, meaning if they were unrestricted the results would still be identical to what they are now (albeit faster) due to the same ability to tune them.

I don't know the exact gains but let's say the HP gain is +18 and the torque increase is +5, that would add +18 and +5 to both bikes, so the difference between them would be what it is currently, just at a higher HP/torque rating.

In a nutshell, the results on a track between these two bikes are negligible and in reality almost identical, and with an unrestricted ECU this would continue to be the case.
I don't think you understand, the bike is restricted in the mid-range and in that case, both engines will pick up power, however, the restrictions at the top end will benefit the R1. It's not even a contest, if you look at the area under the curve.

The engine doesn't output the full power. I don't recall the details, and I'm sure someone here would know them better than I would off the top of my head, but past 10-12k RPM or so the throttle bodies close down, etc. Look at some dyno charts after an ECU flash and marvel at how the torque doesn't just start falling.

The extra 2k of lost power/overrev is huge!

Here's something I found with a quick search, not sure if it's representative, but it gives you an idea:


2015 R1 Track Toy (
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
)


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
///3oris is offline  
post #16 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 06:54 PM
I eat my R1
 
Munkyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: NYC
Posts: 333
///3oris is correct.

I am sorry NYA, but without familiarity of how Engines, ESPECIALLY these engines produce power, you wont understand what the extra Top 2K end of the RPM would end result in power. Its not a mere 4-5 HP or 3-4 Torque.

Look, No one is shitting on your R1s. Its a very capable machine.. I cant stress that enough... This is not a pissing contest of who's got the bigger stick here... So please don't take it that way.

When you are looking at a Dyno Sheet, You are seeing how the engine makes power. If the dyno sheets tapered off hugely from left to right on the top end, then this conversation would be null. But Having your Rev range be cut short at 12200 versus 14200 is a BIG deal in terms of power for these bikes specifically. When all the highest power is made on the very top end of any DYNO pull in ANY gear, what that means is that three bikes on a straight away (a 20 mile runway strip for example) one R1s, one R1 and one R1M, with similar riders wearing all the same protective gear, weighing in at 200lb (for example) Launching their bikes off a dead stop, here is the play by play of what is going to occur here.

Off the line, R1S doesn't have launch control... The R1 and R1M take off a second or two ahead of the R1s (even if you are the most skilled rider you may cut that time down without a proper launch control system) Then come the gear shift, both the R1 and R1S are making more top end power in first gear bolting them a second or two ahead, but when the shift comes the fact that the R1S has to shift first, but takes more time to do the shift without the quick shifter, will lag the R1S behind the other two. The R1 and R1M stay close together, but the R1M is slightly lighter, so power to weight will bolster it slightly ahead in each gear change, where as the R1S will bolster slightly behind in each shift due to the lack of the quick shifter and the lower REV limit. The difference in suspension setups on all bikes will help keep the power on the ground in different ways. With the R1M being on the high end. In the end you will see the R1S coming in last, the R1 coming in second, and the R1M coming in first.

Yes these bikes in stock form are meant to make the same amount of power, but HOW they make their power is different... Thats the important part.

If and when you tune all three, the same will still apply... In similar circumstances, they will react the same way...

Now to you, someone that may street their bike 80-90 percent of the time, and take your R1S to the track, that may not matter, and that is okay... Nothing wrong with that, however the people that track their bike more so than the latter, will want every ounce of power and weight savings that they can squeeze out.
tly

One of the most contested oppositions right now to the R1 in the Liter bike category is the BMW S1000rr... That bike is fast, and in the beginning when the R1 was first released, the BMW would always win those side by side shootouts... Recently however, with the tuning coming up to par with what the BMW world has had for years due to having basically the same platform for years, that has changed... Now more and more R1's are shining in every shootout as of recent...

I love healthy competition, and I am a pretty competitive rider when it comes down to it. The first week I got my 2015, I flashed it and threw on an exhaust system. The first DAY I got my 2016, I did the same...

I for one will never judge someone for getting an R1S over an R1, each person has their own motivation for when it comes down to purchases.

But I can guarantee you, once the dyno's start coming out for the R1S's and the R1's for 2016, you will see the before and after effect of having the extra 2K Red Line,

Most of the shelf tunes will taper out at 178 for the R1... But look at this:
This is Superbikes unlimited's Tune of the R1, Its very Linear from left to right, and has a pretty smooth power delivery (almost no curves) Pay special attention to how the last 12,200 t0 14,200 you go from 170 something to 198 in power.
you WOULD NOT be able to do this on an R1S. The valves would start floating and you would be bouncing off the rev limiter. at 170 HP or so...


Last edited by Munkyy; 07-08-2016 at 06:57 PM.
Munkyy is offline  
post #17 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 07:10 PM
I eat my R1
 
Munkyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: NYC
Posts: 333
And for those of you that dont think dyno tuning with a good tuner can get you close to 200 HP WHP on these bikes... Seek to 14 Minutes and 10 seconds in this video below:

Munkyy is offline  
post #18 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 07:53 PM Thread Starter
Gian11
 
gsa013's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,156
Garage
great post Munkyy.
gsa013 is online now  
post #19 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-08-2016, 08:37 PM
The R1S Guy!
 
Nya`'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munkyy View Post
///3oris is correct.

I am sorry NYA, but without familiarity of how Engines, ESPECIALLY these engines produce power, you wont understand what the extra Top 2K end of the RPM would end result in power. Its not a mere 4-5 HP or 3-4 Torque.

Look, No one is shitting on your R1s. Its a very capable machine.. I cant stress that enough... This is not a pissing contest of who's got the bigger stick here... So please don't take it that way.

When you are looking at a Dyno Sheet, You are seeing how the engine makes power. If the dyno sheets tapered off hugely from left to right on the top end, then this conversation would be null. But Having your Rev range be cut short at 12200 versus 14200 is a BIG deal in terms of power for these bikes specifically. When all the highest power is made on the very top end of any DYNO pull in ANY gear, what that means is that three bikes on a straight away (a 20 mile runway strip for example) one R1s, one R1 and one R1M, with similar riders wearing all the same protective gear, weighing in at 200lb (for example) Launching their bikes off a dead stop, here is the play by play of what is going to occur here.

Off the line, R1S doesn't have launch control... The R1 and R1M take off a second or two ahead of the R1s (even if you are the most skilled rider you may cut that time down without a proper launch control system) Then come the gear shift, both the R1 and R1S are making more top end power in first gear bolting them a second or two ahead, but when the shift comes the fact that the R1S has to shift first, but takes more time to do the shift without the quick shifter, will lag the R1S behind the other two. The R1 and R1M stay close together, but the R1M is slightly lighter, so power to weight will bolster it slightly ahead in each gear change, where as the R1S will bolster slightly behind in each shift due to the lack of the quick shifter and the lower REV limit. The difference in suspension setups on all bikes will help keep the power on the ground in different ways. With the R1M being on the high end. In the end you will see the R1S coming in last, the R1 coming in second, and the R1M coming in first.

Yes these bikes in stock form are meant to make the same amount of power, but HOW they make their power is different... Thats the important part.

If and when you tune all three, the same will still apply... In similar circumstances, they will react the same way...

Now to you, someone that may street their bike 80-90 percent of the time, and take your R1S to the track, that may not matter, and that is okay... Nothing wrong with that, however the people that track their bike more so than the latter, will want every ounce of power and weight savings that they can squeeze out.
tly

One of the most contested oppositions right now to the R1 in the Liter bike category is the BMW S1000rr... That bike is fast, and in the beginning when the R1 was first released, the BMW would always win those side by side shootouts... Recently however, with the tuning coming up to par with what the BMW world has had for years due to having basically the same platform for years, that has changed... Now more and more R1's are shining in every shootout as of recent...

I love healthy competition, and I am a pretty competitive rider when it comes down to it. The first week I got my 2015, I flashed it and threw on an exhaust system. The first DAY I got my 2016, I did the same...

I for one will never judge someone for getting an R1S over an R1, each person has their own motivation for when it comes down to purchases.

But I can guarantee you, once the dyno's start coming out for the R1S's and the R1's for 2016, you will see the before and after effect of having the extra 2K Red Line,

Most of the shelf tunes will taper out at 178 for the R1... But look at this:
This is Superbikes unlimited's Tune of the R1, Its very Linear from left to right, and has a pretty smooth power delivery (almost no curves) Pay special attention to how the last 12,200 t0 14,200 you go from 170 something to 198 in power.
you WOULD NOT be able to do this on an R1S. The valves would start floating and you would be bouncing off the rev limiter. at 170 HP or so...

Here is the reality, and it's pixel accurate, you can check the image yourself if you want in photoshop, I got all of the peaks dead on at 1000% zoom.

Also I wouldn't use race fuel as a baseline, it's unrealistic and more of a benchmark than standard operation, regardless with race fuel the climb is even, it's just higher output.

182 HP vs. 192 HP on 92 octane pump gas, so it would be 10 HP different with an identical peak torque range, I'm not going to get into hardware debates that we both know are beyond us or hypothetical situations, the proof is in the pudding that you linked.


Last edited by Nya`; 07-08-2016 at 10:57 PM.
Nya` is offline  
post #20 of 67 (permalink) Old 07-09-2016, 09:17 AM
I eat my R1
 
yamaharandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatalo View Post
I am still curious how "R1S came close to the performance levels of R1M" was interpreted as "R1S beat R1M in every category" and on top of that "already proven"...
Im curious to how you cant read the results properly.
The r1s beat the r1m in basically all the tests they did. The 0-60 time it stomped the r1m. 2.7 vs 3.3. Thats a big margin at those speeds.

The track test was basically a tie. As 1 rider was able to run a faster lap on the s.
yamaharandy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Yamaha R1 Forum: YZF-R1 Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome