Yamaha R1 Forum: YZF-R1 Forums banner
1 - 20 of 52 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Would someone please translate the dyno graph on SportRider's website. I couldn't find my magnifing glass to read it. And what is the torque like compared to the Gixxer?

Thanks guys
 

·
I will be a Better Rider.
Joined
·
218 Posts
2004 Honda CBR1000RR

CLICKY

I am @ work. Right-Click on mouse disabled. So i can't post pics.:mad:
 

·
pavement tester....
Joined
·
7,270 Posts
Hmm, looks like the G1k and ZX10 make more power than the yammi up until about 11k rpm. So that means you'd better keep the revs up!

The new R1 should scream though at over 12k!

either way, thats mucho power...
 

·
7th Kyu
Joined
·
1,452 Posts
Wow, that's interesting information. So basically, my 2003 R1 has more power where I need it for street riding than a 2004. Very interesting.
 

·
Tuning forks all the way
Joined
·
136 Posts
Now I'm really curious to see how the shoot-out goes and how useable the power is coupled with each bike's respective gearing and handling. Guess we'll have to wait for the first shootout from MCN next Wednesday.
 

·
.
Joined
·
392 Posts
The combination of an extender RPM and the power band kicking in higher the RPM range should help at the track. This should allow rolling the throttle sooner coming out of corners with less worries about spinning the rear tire up allowing for faster acceleration out of corners and down the straight.

Just a thought.:beer
 

·
Git er' done
Joined
·
164 Posts
Not really, it means the 04 R1 rider will have to keep the motor singing high to get good drive off the corners, even more so off the slower corners which will equate into a bigger chance of high rpm wheel spin which is worse and less controllable, example, so much HP on top that DiSalvos Superstock bike was spinning up the rear tire half way down the straights at the tire tests, result: a blistered blown tire that tossed his azz down the track at 170mph. NOT good.
 

·
Git er' done
Joined
·
164 Posts
Just a continuation on the thought, ever notice how the big v twin Ducatis and Honda RC51's got really good drive off the corners? They had inherently torquey motors down low, which in turn gave them better drive with much less fuss and chassis upset. Vice versa, the bigger 4 cylinder bikes with peakier power bands would notoriously spin up the rear, especially getting on to the banking at DIS. I imagine the new 04 R1 will be trickyier to get haulin out of corners because of the peaky engine config. but once it can smooth out and accelerate, it should be fun to watch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
yamarulz said:
Just a continuation on the thought, ever notice how the big v twin Ducatis and Honda RC51's got really good drive off the corners? They had inherently torquey motors down low, which in turn gave them better drive with much less fuss and chassis upset. Vice versa, the bigger 4 cylinder bikes with peakier power bands would notoriously spin up the rear, especially getting on to the banking at DIS. I imagine the new 04 R1 will be trickyier to get haulin out of corners because of the peaky engine config. but once it can smooth out and accelerate, it should be fun to watch.
I don't think the twins shoot out of corners well because they have torque-ier motors than the fours because they don't. The fours have a grip load more torque throughout the powerband. you're right though when you said that twins tend to keep they're tires down on the ground better than fours therefore are more able to deliver power efficiently. Reason being (read form somewhere a while ago...) twin engines pulsate at a slower rate than fours so in esseance the twin motor gives the tires enough time to regain its grip with the road between each pulsating interval. However, the fours have motors that pulsate at a much higher frequency and what this amounts to can be simply put in that fours do not give the tires as much time to "regrip" the road between each pulsing interval. what it boils down to is that twins are able to keep the rear planted moreso than fours (in general) when rolling on/off the throttle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
90 Posts
Disappointed but not surprised

After a long wait and much anticipation these numbers on the new R1 have sealed my decision to look elsewhere for a replacement of my crashed 2002. The narrow frame, underseat exhaust and absence of a gen or trigger off the crank had me going with great expectations this would be the bike for me. The shorter stroke was a warning but I did not expect this change to have such a dramatic effect on overall performance.

According to what I've seen so far the 2002-03 models would make better street bikes. These bike had a short enough stroke why make it even smaller driving the character of the engine to be even more "peaky"? This is somewhat of a trend. Ducati has shortend the stroke in the 998 and the 999 (the racing one) engines. Guess they also thought their engones did not spin up quick enough. These, while having weaker top ends, have a more useful low and midrange powerband for street use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,772 Posts
Looking at hp @ rpm only is half of the truth.
Looking at hp @ "%of rpm span" would be closer to reality because the gearing is also part of the conversion of HP in thrust.
If one engine revs 20% higher than the other (04R1 vs 02R1 for example), it may use a 20% shorter gearing to achieve the same speed, thus compensating the different performance curves. Just comparing performance vs. rpm is missleading.
Let's say the 04 R1 does not kick in at 4000RPM but at 5000. But as the 04R1 may use a 20% shorter gearing to reach the same speed (due to wider rpm range), roll on accelleration would be similar.
The only thing that is sure to tell is that the 04R1 will need higher RPM for performance, but it is also capable to rev higher!
 

·
mmmmm...black bike
Joined
·
1,856 Posts
I have to say that looking at the chart....if that is really correct....the G1k has a SERIOUS advantage all the way up the revs up to 12000....wow
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,772 Posts
the G1k has a SERIOUS advantage all the way up the revs up to 12000....wow
... but the R1 keeps on until 13700!!!

Actually the performance curves vs rpm by itself don't tell to much because there is gearing in between. The R1 has a 14% higher redline than a G1K for example, resulting in a 14% shorter gearing.
How about power vs speed (that's how to express accelleration)
Lets asume all bikes are set to a gear that takes them to the same speed at redline.
I have done some number crunching to figure out what we got really, the resulting diagram is "hp vs speed". (actually just condensed the different diagrams o sportrider to have a common span ending at 12. (12 doesn't have an actual meaning here, the x-axis is speed and depends on the gear)

Interesting, isn't it?
After all the new R1 does it via higher RPM and for most of the range is leading. The Zx10 does have some advantage in the top range, but is loosing lots of ground in upper midrange.
I guess it will be much more fun to ride the R1 than any other ;)
 

Attachments

1 - 20 of 52 Posts
Top