| Author | Message | ||
     Travelingman |
Just ran 1125R at local shop here in South Texas. Hopefully upload attachment button works. Attached is sheet. SAE Corrections were used 6th gear - Three runs consistent 129 HP at rear wheel, 74.3 Ft LBS Torque AFR 14.6 to 14.7 over three runs 160 miles per hour 4th and 5th gear runs produced 2HP less and torque is iin the 71 FT LB range. | ||
| Travelingman |
Let try this for attachment.  | ||
| No_rice |
hmmm. i hate to say it but i liked the last few dyno sheets i saw ALOT better. wonder whats up with that | ||
| Zac4mac |
160 in 6th at redline? tire slip? Mine was 126HP in 5th at 155mph, informal run, no paperwork, no torque. We just stuck it on the dyno after I 'd been riding 30 or 40 miles. Pretty much same end result tho... Just under 130 ponies, out of the box. I'm tickled shitless. Z | ||
| Oldog |
Impressive, allow the diff for slip and friction losses of 10% to 15% 160 mph! 146 at the crank is believeable | ||
| No_rice |
there were a couple on here shortly after they came out that were about 140 and 80 | ||
| Baggermike |
Before buying this bike I read many articals on breaking in a bike, some said the way the manual says is safe but wrong, I did a thread on it, but did not get any results. I would like to know if some one broke the bike in by running it hard, as the manual says not to, and the first fifty miles are the most important, I did like a mix of what I learned to breaking the motor in because I was not sure what to do so I did what made sence to me, maybe I will get to dyno it this summer and see how much it is putting out, to see if the numbers match. Mike | ||
| Rocketman |
If somewhere under 130 rwhp turns out a good average for all 1125's out of the box, I believe there's an anonymous poster on BadWeB with a seriously sick older model R1  Hey come on. You gotta laugh. It's all in good humour. I gotta win at least one argument. Rocket | ||
| Socoken |
http://yzf-r1forum.net/old/Specs.html Specs on R1s from 1998 to 2002 range from 128 to 136, so says this yamaha site. | ||
| Rocketman |
And if anonymous' older model R1 was beaten on the same dyno as an 1125 putting out somewhere close, but under 130rwhp, then anonymous' R1 is down on power if we are to believe the figures posted in the link. Rocket | ||
| Socoken |
The link says it uses its figures from Sport Rider magazine, whatever that means. Different dynos in different places in different years. My point was, "seriously sick" might be a stretch. | ||
| Rocketman |
Indeed it might. But 128 is a seriously low stretch for an R1 any older than 2004. Which makes me wonder how old anonymous' R1 is, and what's the relevance of comparison to an 1125 and a 4+ year old R1? Rocket | ||
| Travelingman |
The warm up on the bike was pretty consistent with the last 100 plus Dyno runs I have done on other bikes. The first three runs were done in 5th gear. Here is the sheet - best out of three in 5th gear first run. Numbers were lower for torque and HP. The sheet above represents 6th gear with a 5 minute waiting period between runs. Dyno blowers directly blowing into radiators. This was a 56 degree day and low humidity (16%). Good day for a dyno run. The only reason for the 6th gear run is to see what top end is on this beast in controlled conditions. Break in was per the book. Now that I know this, there are some roads in the hill country we can try and achieve it on. The bike has a lot of potential out of the box. The 146 plus ponies is at the crank not at the tire. The loss of HP is pretty typical accounting for drivetrain. Heres some other bike examples to compare this to; two bikes modified with exhaust, chips, aircleaner, spockets, etc... 2005 Busa - 5th gear run 144 HP Torque 88 - This bike is rate at 175HP 2004 Honda CBR 1000RR - 5th gear 151HP Torque 77 This bike is rate at 169 HP Considering Buell has added there touch to the EFI system and ECM. I would expect to see some race tuners on the market to help with some of those untamed ponies locked up. The AFR was consistent for three 5th gear runs three 6th gear runs and three 4th gear runs. 14.6. to 14.7. Using some tuning magic I could help that down to 13.8 to 14.1. Enjoy the ride. Lets have a few more Dyno run postings that way we can get a idea of stock units in different conditions. I would like to see some of those Cali bikes here.  | ||
| Travelingman |
One other point to make on Dyno runs. If you Dyno your bike have the operator use the SAE corrections and 5 on the smoothing. I could have cheated (at least my opinion) here and used the STD correction on the Dynojet 250i. We did account for this and used them after the 5th gear run and got 133 plus ponies (this should help with the R1 discussion). But in order to be fair the DYNO run should be done using SAE (Society of Automotive Engineering) corrections. | ||
| Dave_bogue |
That's about 20 more RWHP than the typical SV1000. Plus, the SV does NOT have Ram-air induction. The claimed dry weight of my naked SV1000 is 410 pounds. That's 35 pounds more than BMC claims for the 1125. Dave | ||
| Vagelis46 |
What RWHP have STOCK R1, CBR, GSXR made on this dyno ?? Any values for STOCK IL4s ? | ||
| Diablo1 |
Did you have any trouble keeping engine temperature down during the dyno run? Did the side mounted radiators give you trouble or not? What kind of engine temperature did you see after a dyno run? | ||
| Travelingman |
Diablo1 Normally would point an Infrared thermometer at top of head and look for temp reading around 225F but Buell doesn't make it easy to get to. So we just used temp readings on the onboard display. As the day was a colder one here in Texas is was a good day for a Dyno run. Before, during, and after test temperature was between 175F to 185F. Dyno has two large blower fans you just stick right up to the radiator boxes to keep engine cool. So radiator boxes are not a problem. | ||
| Blake |
Thank you very much for posting your 1125R dyno charts Ed (TravelingMan).  That makes three that I've seen so far and all have come in close 130 RWHP. | ||
| Blake |
100 SAE RWHP at 7,300 RPM. That's SWEET! It's not long from there to 8,700 RPM and 120 SAE RWHP. For the $19,995 "RR" streetable version, it likely won't be much of a chore to re-pipe the exhaust, and race tune the ECM to increase the torque peak to 80 FT-LB and move it to the right about 1,500 rpm. That'd yield a peak output right near 160 SAE RWHP. Add some expert headwork and cams, bump the compression... maybe get up to 180 RWHP. 130 RWHP is more than enough for me, but it's always fun to see what the high performance and racing specialists can do. ![: ]](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/clipart/proud.gif) | ||
| Arillius13 |
I wouldnt say that the so called R1 you all are talking about would have to be super sick or super old to be beaten by an 1125R consider these are the specs for a 2003 R1: Manufacturer (Make) Yamaha Model Name YZF-R1 Year 2003 Category(class) Sport Engine Engine Capacity (Displacement) 998 ccm (60.9 cubic inches) Engine Type inline, 4 cylinders Stroke 4 Timing System DOHC Powertrain Chassis/Suspension/Brakes Dimensions Seat Height 815 mm (32.09 inches) Wheelbase 1395 mm (54.92 inches) Curb Weight 174 kg (384 lb) Fuel Capacity 17 litres (4.49 gallons) Performance Max Power 150.00 HP (109.5 kW) at 10500 RPM Max Torque 105.00 Nm (77.21 ft*lbs) at 8500 RPM Power/Weight Ratio 0.86 Thats pretty damn similar, mind you that is 5 years old. But this is the first year for the 1125R. If the 1125R given the time, research, testing and money that has been invested into the R1 im sure it could be putting out 160 to the ground now too. | ||
| Rocketman |
Consider the 2006 Yamaha R1-SP, a track orientated special, was rated at 178 crankshaft HP by Yamaha themselves. That's from a 20 valve IL 4 with factory modified heads and f.i mods. Not being one to argue  , but the laws of diminishing returns will never see an 1125 putting out 180 rwhp. That's just not possible without building a high capacity drag race grenade. Rocket | ||
| Rocketman |
I wouldnt say that the so called R1 you all are talking about would have to be super sick or super old to be beaten by an 1125R After the 2004 model R1, Yamaha revamped the motor for all that followed. Without splitting hairs, all models since 2004 have a crankshaft rating around 175HP. So yes, it would have to be an older than 2004 model R1, or if not, a seriously sick one for an 1125 to have an R1 beat with HP. Based solely on my own research and observations, I'd have a hard time thinking the RC8 will be up there with current model R1's when it comes to performance. What will be an interesting power comparison is that of the RC8 v 1125. Both engines and induction systems are of similar design. The major difference being only the cooling system lay-out, that may or may not have any significant effect on power output. Rocket | ||
| Ducxl |
Uhh,Rocket..Ducati 1098R makes 180 crank HP | ||
| Xb9 |
Travelingman: "Using some tuning magic I could help that down to 13.8 to 14.1." How much do you think it will gain getting it there? Zeitronix makes a wide-band o2 controller with an adjustable narrowband output signal switching point. You'd need two kit's, one for each cylinder. It would allow you to adjust the A/F ratio richer. http://www.zeitronix.com/questions/NBpoint.htm In theory it should work; the ECM will get a demand for more fuel in closed loop, learn it, and adjust the LFV richer to effect open loop. 14.0 would be a 5% adjustment, so the LFV should go about 5 points higher. | ||
| Baggermike |
Hey guys seem like every one is having a pissing contest here and forgetting that the bike was made to be fun on the street and not a peak hp bike, and from what I have read the motor has the potential to kick ass, so while those other bikes are reading peak hp the buell will be more fun to ride than any other of those other bikes, and is that not why we ride buells guys to have fun, I am not saying I would not want more hp but I would not want to get rid of the almost flat tq line which makes the bike a buell and very fun to ride. Mike | ||
| Darkice19 |
Yep its fun to ride. If i wanted more HP i would have bought a hayabusa. Its almost the same price. But im not part of the LOOK AT ME Crowd.(Think im part of the Leave me alone or ill stab you crowd) You can Dyno the bike 100 times and end up with 100 different results. But is nice to see the difference between hp at the crank and hp at the back tire. | ||
| Chadhargis |
What everyone needs to remember during a HP discussion, is that a well ridden "slow" bike will always beat a poorly ridden "fast" bike. You can't buy skill. | ||
| Dave_bogue |
Torque: 50 foot lbs- 3000 rpm 60 foot lbs- 4000 rpm 70+ foot lbs starting at 5000 rpm This on a motorcycle with a claimed dry weight of 375 pounds. This is why I like the modern liquid cooled V2 sportbike. This will be one fun bike to ride! Dave | ||
| 86129squids |
Most here are arguing over just what size and shape hole this new peg will fit in, whilst those FEW who have ridden it near its limits find that the peg just slipped through an unexpected hole, quickly, like buttah. Preconceived notions and spec sheet racing are a waste of time. GO RIDE ONE, friends. (Ideally, one that has been healthily broken in...) Speaking of Yamahas, I have had both an RZ350, modified, and a stock FZ700. The new Buell reminds me of the best of both: it has the lightning quickness of the RZ but the midrange/legs and handling (+3) of the FZ. I feel that this machine will help redefine the genre. |
