Torque competition.

[pritch]

The only conclusive test is to match the bikes' acceleration from the same speed,in the same gear for each gear

That can be misleading as well. The GSXR1000 will beat a CBR in a roll on contest but the magazine testers point out that this has more to do with the fact that the Honda is higher geared than anything else


And what all this Nm shit, doesn't anyone here speak English ?

Actually I have been looking up some figures. There is no contest. The twins don't rate except in the mind of their owners which is all that matters really.

[pritch]

Not having had my bike tested, but then it isn't a performance machine anyway, I would like to offer the following:

These figures are all borrowed from that excellent publication BIKE.
They are all in foot pounds because the English still speak English.
(Well some of them... :-)

Typing and other errors are all mine.

Aprillia RSVR 67 @ 8000rpm
BMW 1150GS 73 @ 5300
Buell X12S 71 @ 5800
Cagiva Raptor 1000 67 @ 7000
Ducati 999S 70 @ 8100
Harley VRod 71 @ 7200
Honda SP2 68 @ 7700
VTR 1000 62 @ 6900
KTM Super Duke 74 @ 7000
Moto Guzzi Brava 64 @ 6000
Suzuki SV1000s 66 @ 7600

BMW K1200 LT 89 @ 8000
Honda CBR1100XX 79 @ 7400
CBR 1000 RR 75 @ 8500
Kawasaki ZX12R 93 @ 7700
ZX10R 76 @ 9400
MV Agusta 1000F4S 73 @ 10,000
Suzuki Hayabusa 95 @ 7000
GSXR 1000 80 @ 9500
Yamaha R1 72 @ 9900

This is not an exhaustive list some big cruisers and the big naked bikes mostly develop more torque.

Like Bob Dylan said, "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."

[Brian d marge]

My little Enfield 500cc single ..sits about 30 to 36 ft/lb ....and wieghs sod all ... and is 1/4 of the cost .....

Soooo in the 1st 10 foot ..I iz a zooming past you fellas ,,then err you lot sort of errrr change gear ..and set every radar off with in 100km..

But I will get a speeding ticket one day ...I will ....tail wind ...moon in the first quarter ....down hill ... tucked in behind the nacelle ....

Well at least my speedo is on my side ,,,it sort of bounces between 90 and 110 ...depending on the road surface ....



Stephen
Still an interesting comparison ...BTW have a look at the goldwings torque ...if I remember it wasnt a slouch.....

[DEATH_INC.]

What do those big assed triumphs make at the rear? (or did I miss it?)Gotta be the most don't they?
The reason that people think twins have lotsa torque is simple,they don't have the top end,so it makes 'em feel more powerful down low.Usta get the same thing on off-road bikes between two and four strokes,all the four stroke boys usta rave about how much torque they had ,but up a hill you could back a two stroke down to idle and pull away,but the old four strokes just gave up and stalled.Even the 500's.

[inlinefour]

I've just been given a FZ50 for the boy. I'll try to get some specs, but I doubt if it'll actually have any tourqe to speak of

[TonyB]

Com'on people- don't any of you have dyno charts?
I submit mine. It has my FZR1000 plotted against a stock 04 R1. So you get two fours for the price of one. Please note that my bike shows no bottom end torque or HP because that is why it was in the shop- the dreaded 0-3000rpm miss. So Twin owners, don't use this to beat Fours over the head, OK?

[SixPackBack]

I've just been given a FZ50 for the boy. I'll try to get some specs, but I doubt if it'll actually have any tourqe to speak of

Hope your son enjoy's it

[White trash]

Yer I know. I was including it on the inline-4 side of things. And having owned the 750-f4 I can confirm it's not a v-twin.

Besides this whole thread's a load of old wank anyway. I seriously doubt many people will buy one bike over another because of half a ft-lb or torque.

YEAH?! Well I think YOU'RE a load of lod wank!!

[inlinefour]

Hope your son enjoy's it

He said that its not cool enough for him (5 year old) and I actually agree. I've got it sorted, can swap it for a z50 or a 80cc dirt bike. I have not told the lad yet. I just said if he does not want it I'll have to find someone who does. I think he is now reconsidering which is more cool. A FZ50, or not bike at all.

[matthewt]

As Nice as a 996 would be would still rather have a 851 / 888 just more classic & raw & thats what I look for in my bikes . Then old School feel .

Yer, I missed out on a 888sp4 because I was leaving for holiday 2 days after I found it. Not so bad though as a friend of mine snapped it up.

[matthewt]

YEAH?! Well I think YOU'RE a load of lod wank!!

Ha ha, whats a lod ??? Besides, I wank just fine

The whole thing changes every few years. Sure Suzuki is top now, but how long until Honda/Kawa/Yama leap-frog them.

[TwoSeven]

I'm not exactly sure what the argument is about.

If you have a v-series engine (eg. a v-four) and an inline 4 that both have the same bore, stroke and gearing you will get the same amount of torque from both.

The difference between the two is in *how* the torque is delivered. If both have the same timing, then you will get exactly the same torque delivery - both will be linear. If the v-series engine has a different timing (as they often do), then you will get pulsed delivery.

Usually the reason why an engine is put in a v-series is to increase the bore size for a given stroke which increases the torque given at the expense of the speed of rotation of the crank (because a bigger piston is heavier etc). Hence v-series engines tend to have more torque at lower rpm.

You could do the same with an inline-4 ,but it would be a rather big engine.

[Pixie]

That can be misleading as well. The GSXR1000 will beat a CBR in a roll on contest but the magazine testers point out that this has more to do with the fact that the Honda is higher geared than anything else


And what all this Nm shit, doesn't anyone here speak English ?

Actually I have been looking up some figures. There is no contest. The twins don't rate except in the mind of their owners which is all that matters really.

Who gives a toss if you have a bigger number (or penis for that matter) if the smaller one out performs it in the real world?

You may as well argue that vehicle X beats vehicle Y,but that's just because vehicle Y was running on Diesel

In the case of the GSXR, it beats the CBR in a roll on,all else is excuses

[slob]

I thought the whole point of this thread was to compare torque curves, not peak torque figures. I haven't experience too many litre bikes, but I'm pretty sure my old '98 TL1000S had a bit more thrust than a '98 R1 I tried up to about 4k rpm?

Torque figures aside, without looking at the HP curves, you wouldn't really get an idea of how quickly the engine revs - and thus how it accelerates. It's all well and good to have heaps of torque at the low to mid rev ranges, but what if it takes ages to get to the redline (think tractor engines..)?
Personally, my ideal road/track-day bike (which I will build one fine hypothetical day) would weigh less than a 250, have about 100hp and heaps of torque everywhere (I'm thinking supermono or hotted up mid-sized twin here)!

[Ixion]

I thought the whole point of this thread was to compare torque curves, not peak torque figures. I haven't experience too many litre bikes, but I'm pretty sure my old '98 TL1000S had a bit more thrust than a '98 R1 I tried up to about 4k rpm?

Torque figures aside, without looking at the HP curves, you wouldn't really get an idea of how quickly the engine revs - and thus how it accelerates. It's all well and good to have heaps of torque at the low to mid rev ranges, but what if it takes ages to get to the redline (think tractor engines..)?
Personally, my ideal road/track-day bike (which I will build one fine hypothetical day) would weigh less than a 250, have about 100hp and heaps of torque everywhere (I'm thinking supermono or hotted up mid-sized twin here)!

Mr Slob is right. It is the curve (or more strictly, the area under the curve) that matters. A high peak torque figure may be meaningless, in extreme circumstances unusable

Imagine an extreme case. An engine with 120 ft pd at 8000 rpm. And 5 ft pd at everything under 7500 rpm.

Really high peak torque but you'd never be able to use it, because you wouldn't be able to get the bike up to 8000 rpm in any gear, because of the low torque at lower revs. The bike wouldn't even be rideable.

Conversely, a bike with a peak of only 50 ft pd but a very flat curve (45 ft pd at 1000 rpm !) might accelerate a lot faster than one with a higher but peaky peak torque. Because it has more power available at lower revs so it gets to its peak faster.

Peak torque is ony relevant on single speed engines.