25 years of sportbike development

[tached1000rr]

Originally Posted by eBBs15

I can't see me, in 10 years being able to ride a street bike for very long... with as track focused they've become in the last 5 years... I can't imagine how uncomfortable they'd be for even a 100 mile jaunt.

the numbers are impressive... but I don't see a point... but then again I'm not a racer. I would rather them focus on makine the bike more rider friendly, little more attention to safety... brighter headlights... tail lights, blinkers, and mirrors that aren't just after thoughts... guages that tell us more info... or has GPS built in... a sport tourer that is more sport than tourer... something with the comfort of a late 90's street bike but with the handeling, weight and power of a 08 or 09.

Idk... just my thoughts

I agree and have always said each of the big four needs more choices just under the race replicas, focused more on practicality for the street oriented crowd.

[No Worries]

Maybe they should graph how the midrange torque has decreased as the horsepower and rpm range has increased. I use midrange torque dozens of times a day. High rpm horsepower? Once a day if I'm lucky.

[Amber Lamps]

Originally Posted by No Worries

Maybe they should graph how the midrange torque has decreased as the horsepower and rpm range has increased. I use midrange torque dozens of times a day. High rpm horsepower? Once a day if I'm lucky.

I'm not sure you're right there, NW. I'm sure that my bike has more torque than yours. Although I do agree that torque has hit a wall since my 1997 YZF1000 had about the same torque numbers as my 2006 GSXR1000 does. For some reason, and it may be on purpose,torque has hovered around 80 ft/lbs in the liter class. It may be that tires aren't good enough for much more than that... You have to remember that whenever the OEMs have produced an engine that was "better" than the corresponding brakes, suspension and tires pandemonium has followed!!!

[tached1000rr]

Originally Posted by TIGGER

I'm not sure you're right there, NW. I'm sure that my bike has more torque than yours. Although I do agree that torque has hit a wall since my 1997 YZF1000 had about the same torque numbers as my 2006 GSXR1000 does. For some reason, and it may be on purpose,torque has hovered around 80 ft/lbs in the liter class. It may be that tires aren't good enough for much more than that... You have to remember that whenever the OEMs have produced an engine that was "better" than the corresponding brakes, suspension and tires pandemonium has followed!!!

I think the difference may lie in where the torque peak occurs between the older and newer models. Older models produced their peak torque at a lower rpm than say the 08-09 class right? I'm not stating fact but just asking as I've not looked for any direct comparsions.

[karl_1052]

Originally Posted by TIGGER

I'm not sure you're right there, NW. I'm sure that my bike has more torque than yours. Although I do agree that torque has hit a wall since my 1997 YZF1000 had about the same torque numbers as my 2006 GSXR1000 does. For some reason, and it may be on purpose,torque has hovered around 80 ft/lbs in the liter class. It may be that tires aren't good enough for much more than that... You have to remember that whenever the OEMs have produced an engine that was "better" than the corresponding brakes, suspension and tires pandemonium has followed!!!

Torque is a function of engine capacity and engine efficiency. The only way to increase torque is to increase engine size.

HP is a function of torque at a specific rpm. Raise the RPM capacity and the HP goes up, but torque will always be the same.

My bike makes 80lb-ft from about 3000 rpm to over 10000rpm, with a peak of just over 100lb-ft at around 8000rpm. All due to the long stroke motor with an additional 340cc over a liter.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by karl_1052

Torque is a function of engine capacity and engine efficiency. The only way to increase torque is to increase breathing capacity.

HP is a function of torque at a specific rpm. Raise the RPM capacity and the HP goes up, but torque will always be the same.

My bike makes 80lb-ft from about 3000 rpm to over 10000rpm, with a peak of just over 100lb-ft at around 8000rpm. All due to the long stroke motor with an additional 340cc over a liter.

fixed

[karl_1052]

Originally Posted by Dave

fixed

But with a given capacity, cylinder filling can only be so efficient, unless there is a giant leap forward in breathing technology. The only other way is a bigger cylinder.

[No Worries]

Torque X RPM divided by 5252 = HP. You have to increase torque and/or RPM to get more HP. But there is a maximum speed that the piston can travel at, as it accelerates from 0-100MPH (or more) and then decelerates as it goes up and down.

Changing the stroke changes where the torque peak occurs. For the riding I do, I'd much rather have an early R1 (long stroke) than a newer one. And for racing across an intersection, a cruiser, with it's torque peak right off idle, will win without any fuss. Plus, they are impossible to stall at a light.

[karl_1052]

Originally Posted by No Worries

And for racing across an intersection, a cruiser, with it's torque peak right off idle, will win without any fuss. Plus, they are impossible to stall at a light.

I would take that challenge.

[Antwanny]

Originally Posted by No Worries

Maybe they should graph how the midrange torque has decreased as the horsepower and rpm range has increased. I use midrange torque dozens of times a day. High rpm horsepower? Once a day if I'm lucky.

agreed but when you use the horsepower its too much fun