| Author | Message | ||
     Pammy |
Dyno'd an 1125cr just now @ 135hp. Rear wheel. STD. Stock. No tq #'s. Didn't hook up the tac. Late. Tired. | ||
| Phelan |
Nice. Must have a lot to do with the newer maps. Most of the early 1125Rs I saw dynosheets of were running around 121-126 RWHP. | ||
| Ratbuell |
Seems about right. Check http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/290 431/518095.html?1259848512 for a set of charts from my CR last month. 143/81 with STD correction, 152 flash, stock bike, 70 degree air temp. | ||
| Spatten1 |
It all depends on the manufacturer of the dyno. Dynojet (accelerometers) often seem to be very optimistic compared to the true brake dynos. | ||
| Ratbuell |
True. But like I say in the thread, I wasn't concerned with absolute numbers...I wanted to baseline the bike, upload the flash, then baseline it again to compare curves. 152 is MUCH smoother, both on the chart and (more importantly) on the road. The fact that it picked up 1hp and 1tq along the way...just a bonus  | ||
| Oldog |
Hey Rat, what is the latest Flashe for the '08 1125r? | ||
| Ratbuell |
I believe the R gets 142; CR is 152. AFAIK the only difference between the 2 is the math for the final drive gearing / speedo calculations. Although now I'm gonna have to dig...some distant bell is ringing in the back of my brain that '08s may be different still because of the injectors and the O2 sensor locations....<shrug> I'm off work recovering, this'll give me something to do LOL. | ||
| Fast1075 |
Pammy, what was the corrected altitude?? just curious... | ||
| Ratbuell |
OK, judging by this: http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/290 431/512240.html?1259099725 It looks like 062 is current for the 2008 1125R. Like I said, I'm off work right now so I don't have a way to check (pesky surgeons want me to rest my leg...), but I want to say that's the right number from a quick check I did when I was at work a couple weeks' ago. | ||
| Chadhargis |
The 152 flash is a BIG difference. I thought my bike was good before, but it's even better now. I'm thinking the 1125 engine has BIG potential, it's just being held back. | ||
| Cataract2 |
Anyone got a dyno on an 08 with the new flash? | ||
| Pammy |
3 feet, 6 feet...I can't remember. | ||
| Fast1075 |
Now THATS some good air Pammy!!!! LOL | ||
| Pammy |
Bike received with 8 miles. Bone stock. Broken in by Wes. Dyno'd by Wes. 135(STD). 131.9(SAE). Pretty impressive if'n you ask me. Not that anyone did. Except the owner,of course. | ||
| Blake |
"Dynojet (accelerometers) often seem to be very optimistic compared to the true brake dynos." The use of a brake or no brake is not hte issue. The Dynojet 250 includes a brake as an option and many have it. Pretty sure Cycle Rama's does. A brake dyno will actually report higher power since the engine is not sacrificing power to spin up the drivetrain. What you are getting at is the Superflow versus Dynojet issue. Both are intertial dynos. Superflow results are typically 10% or so lower than Dynojet. The Dynojet RWHP has pretty much become the standard by which RWHP is referenced. Superflow even includes and option to convert their lower results to Dynojet. | ||
| Chadhargis |
I measure how much power mine has by how loud I say "whoa $hit!" when I twist the happy handle. Numbers mean nothing to me with my butt is sucking up seat. | ||
| Justa4banger |
Nice numbers on the CR.. Overall dyno numbers just prop up peoples ego's .... Its when you do changes to the engine and redyno to see gains or losses that makes a difference....using the same dyno is key... Here's a Dyno i did on my Stang from over the course of a 1.5 yrs... Same dyno shop, same dyno, just made changes to the setup... This is the kind of proof you want to see from using a dyno, whether is a mustang or dynojet or whatever.... http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l51/justa4banger /First_now_dynos.jpg This kind of proof shows you where your money went. So what are the next planned mods for your CR? |
