Tpoppa Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 I would expect a bike making that kind of power to sound meaner 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kritz Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) Let's assume for just a minute that the 404hp figure is real. Take that for granted. Like I said in my first post, it's an impressive number, but the number doesn't mean anything unless you're having a dyno competition, or comparing it directly to another bike that is the same make and model (i.e. same weight, gearing, and other handling characteristics). Look at a car like the Aerial Atom. "low" horsepower, but HUGE performance. It embarrasses cars with twice or three times the horsepower. I imagine a 400hp cruiser (regardless of manufacturer) can probably easily be out-performed by a stock FZ6, or other comparable bike with less power, but also less weight. The cruiser will have a torque advantage, but I bet it still takes 11+ seconds to make a quarter mile pass. I really try not to bash cruisers, but I do think it's silly to try to turn them into something they're not. If you want to cruise, cruise! Why try to turn a Winnebago into a dragster?Rick Mcwaters used to run this Yamaha in the pro star cruiser class. It ran 9.0 at over 150MPH on a shootout street tire. The bike was all motor with no NOS or turbocharging. He also has a Superglide that he runs 9.70's with at Norwalk on a street tire. . Here's a link to "Patrick Racing" website. http://www.patrickracingbillet.com/patrick-racing.html Also a link to Ricks shop "Cycle Tech" which is in Bucyrus, Ohio. http://www.bucyruscycletech.com/ Edited March 5, 2014 by Kritz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kritz Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Why? Because it's Miller Time, that's why. How about a fast Smart? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Why? Because it's Miller Time, that's why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kritz Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 LOL!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carwhore Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carwhore Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gixxus Christ! Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 7.92 at 180....bandit for the win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gixxus Christ! Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Sounds fucking mean... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokey Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Sounds fucking mean... Sandals are a nice touch!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gixxus Christ! Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Safety first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Did the 238hp Sanger Cycles guy say the bike was only capable of 160?The 5 speed must really hold it back... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gixxus Christ! Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 That top speed is also static on a dyno where aerodynamics are a non issue. Thinking real world is closer to 140....If you can hold it on the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 It's the low revs that really limit top speed, If your engine only has 4k of usable rpm, you need to make your gears much taller which is going to consume all that extra torque. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 That top speed is also static on a dyno where aerodynamics are a non issue. Thinking real world is closer to 140....If you can hold it on the road. so all that modification to obtain a real-world top speed equal to the $500 Katana 750 in my garage... Makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 ^^Every once in a while I need to remind my brother that a 'fast Harley' is only fast when compared to a stock Harley. He bought a built Harley with thousands in go fast parts. The guy who built it said it was a 10 second bike. He was convinced it could beat my Buell 1125R. It couldn't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 140, so 4th gear on my bike? not even red line. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kritz Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 ^^Every once in a while I need to remind my brother that a 'fast Harley' is only fast when compared to a stock Harley. He bought a built Harley with thousands in go fast parts. The guy who built it said it was a 10 second bike. He was convinced it could beat my Buell 1125R. It couldn't Many of those guys have absolutely no clue how fast a sportbike is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Many of those guys have absolutely no clue how fast a sportbike is. completely true. I used to work with a woman who learned to ride and bought a pretty nice Honda Shadow. It was a nice solid, reliable, comfortable cruiser. But she was 100% convinced that her bike was faster than my EX500, because mine was "only a 500." And the EX was only a sportbike in the loosest sense of the word. I don't think most people really wrap their heads around 100+ horsepower on a machine that only weighs 600 lbs with the rider... Modern 600's will hit 60mph in under 3 seconds. Modern liter bikes can probably do it in under 2 seconds with a good launch. That's faster than virtually any production car in the world. "Faster than a Lamborghini" seems to register with more people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gixxus Christ! Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 When I had my tl I passed some dick on a harley when the Rd was 2 lanes. He spent the next 5 miles of 1 lane road coming up beside me, revving his shit box motor, just being a dick. Now he had everything in the screaming eagle catalog on his motor and he probably thought it was fast. As soon as it opened back up to 2 lanes I launched on him at the light, bounced 1st off the Rev limiter and power shifted 2nd and was doing 85 on one wheel before I knew it. At the next light he asked me how big my motor was. I pointed to the '1000' on my fairing. He was like 'I have 1340 cc, my bike is faster'. Green light, he does a burnout and tries to launch and I just pass him like he's standing still. For some reason he wanted more but I had proved my point and was at the turnoff for my street. Didn't someone on here smoke a 1200 spotster with a honda 450 a few years back? I seem to recall that happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 I pointed to the '1000' on my fairing. He was like 'I have 1340 cc, my bike is faster'. Part of that is plain ole' stupidity, but the other part is HD marketing. They convince people that if they spend enough they can turn their modern antique into a performance machine. And they can prove this with all the 'real' 100hp+ dyno charts on the wall by the service department. When I bought my Buell 1125R the sales guy referred to it a beginner bike, and someday I could step up to a big twin (I'm sure that was the sales pitch straight from HD corporate). I asked him how 130hp and less than 400lbs was for beginners and how 65hp and 750+ lbs was a 'step up.' His answer had something to do with big displacement. It's what they're supposed to say. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Lol I smoked a sportster in a bolt on 99 Mustang gt... That car put down 265 to the wheels... Dude was so embarrassed he didn't even pull forward next to me at the next light... I'm sure the one in this video is fast, but generally they really aren't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gixxus Christ! Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Lol....harley makes an ok bike for what it is. People often ask me why I don't just buy a harley. I tell them that I don't want one, that they don't make a bike for me. Their immediate response is either sportster or vrod. I remind them that one is slow and the other handles like a fat chick on a bigwheel. I've ridden several harley bikes, the acceleration of the vrod impressed me but that's about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) off topic, but...ever wonder why the Buell made an 1125cc bike when the AMA/WSBK rules allowed for twins to be up to 1200cc? answer: The Vrod was 1130cc at the time, and HD required the Buell motor to be smaller. They expected riders would someday want to move up to the big HD bikes edit: losing interest in HD bashing...for now. Edited March 6, 2014 by Tpoppa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kritz Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Tpoppa, a good nights sleep and you can get right back at it 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.