Torque competition.

**WRT** · 8th August 2005, 09:01

Just to add more fuel to the debate . . . a good site for bike stats. Dunno how accurate they are, but it does give you a nice wealth of info at your finger tips . . .

http://www.motorbikes.be/en/

**scumdog** · 8th August 2005, 09:50

Hmmm, torque?

Does my bike get me from A to B ok? Yes
Do I have to change down to pass cars? No
Do I have to change down to get up hills? No

Then I have enought torque IMHO.

Any more would just be 'extra-icing' on the cake.

530ft/lb torque with the F100 though.

**Waylander** · 8th August 2005, 13:14

Originally Posted by TonyB

man has this tread ever gone off track. At least Waylander understands what WT is trying to do. But I suspect Waylander is refering to a Warrior, which makes all that loverly torque by having lots of cubes.

Licky guess

Beutifull bike though isn't it.

**vifferman** · 8th August 2005, 13:30

Interesting thread, despite the personal attacks, drunken ramblings, etc. If nothing else, it got me doing some investigation. The VTR1000 and VFR800 have the same (quoted) power of 81kW (yeah, right!) but the VTR (996 cc) produces 97 mutant-eaters at 7k rpm, whereas the VFR (781 cc) produces 82 torque thingies at 8.5K rpm.

So?
Dunno.
They both have around the same top speed and performance figures, but feel completely different in the way though go about it, with the v-twin having a much flatter torque curve, higher gearing, and a more relaxed feel about it. An '05 CBR600RR has a similar power output as well, but less of them torque thingies, and revs higher. It also feels much more busy and less powerful until the revs get up into 5 digits.

So?
Dunno....

**TonyB** · 8th August 2005, 14:07

Originally Posted by Waylander

Licky guess

Beutifull bike though isn't it.

'Lucky guess' my left testicle! I knew what it was- you've been babbling about buying one! Had to be it then eh

**Waylander** · 8th August 2005, 14:16

Originally Posted by TonyB

'Lucky guess' my left testicle! I knew what it was- you've been babbling about buying one! Had to be it then eh

I babble about buying alot of bikes though. Used to be a Rocket III then it was a 636, now it's the Road Warrior. Very serious about few though and this is one of the serious ones. Something that can go quik looks and sounds good AND is not a bike that the majority have. In fact I havn't seen one on the road here yet.

And ya know the more I think about it that fat pipe is starting to grow on me. Doesn't seem as ugly to me anymore.

**TonyB** · 8th August 2005, 14:23

Originally Posted by Waylander

I babble about buying alot of bikes though. Used to be a Rocket III then it was a 636, now it's the Road Warrior. Very serious about few though and this is one of the serious ones. Something that can go quik looks and sounds good AND is not a bike that the majority have. In fact I havn't seen one on the road here yet.

And ya know the more I think about it that fat pipe is starting to grow on me. Doesn't seem as ugly to me anymore.

Well I knew it wasn't a Rocket III because they make a whole lot more torque than that. Couldn't see it being the Kwaka 2 litre or a VTX for some reason. So thought it had to be the Warrior. Elementry, my dear Waylander.

**Hitcher** · 8th August 2005, 18:51

Originally Posted by White trash

Who the hell has the most torques in their bike here? Is it an inline four or a smelly v-twin?

Or perhaps a V-4...

**Big Dave** · 8th August 2005, 19:14

Originally Posted by White trash

But Garry, you don't got a RIII. Also, it aint an inline four or a V-Twin. And I'm talkin' road bikes, not some Koala rooting race thingy.....

Edit: And Triumph will tell ya it beats a Busa, let's see it on the strip. A pommy bike mag's already proven it doesn't.

You're welcome.

Beats it to 4th gear when power-to-weight and aerodynamics take over.
Have video.

Anyway how do you know - you don't read magazines any more.

**White trash** · 8th August 2005, 19:21

Originally Posted by Big Dave

Anyway how do you know - you don't read magazines any more.

What I meant to say was, I only read pommy magazines with lotsa wheelies, and no dirt bike stuff (not that I got anything against dirt bikes), or magazine articles I have personally botched my way through in an atempt to look a lot cleverer than I actually am.

**DEATH_INC.** · 8th August 2005, 19:27

Originally Posted by speedpro

Gotta be careful here, that bigger bore results in a larger surface area of the piston crown which with the same combustion pressure will result in a greater force pushing the piston down the bore. (pressure per sq" X area). Depending on rod length etc it could actually end up with more torque. The shorter stroke allows more rpm, if the bigger bore results in the same torque the end result will be more power. Lots of variables though, and absolutley nothing to do with the reason this thread was started.

But the longer stroke has a larger crank throw,more leverage to turn the crank=more torque.(if you keep the same capacity of course...)
Outta interest,what's that beast of yours make?

**Big Dave** · 8th August 2005, 19:42

Trophy 1200

**WINJA** · 8th August 2005, 20:00

Originally Posted by Big Dave

Trophy 1200

THOSE ARE GOOD NUMBERS FOR A 750

**Sensei** · 8th August 2005, 20:01

Don't know what to say ?? Don't ZX 636R put out more HP than that & torque ? What happend to the old 1200 Daytona 147HP & as much torque as a truck Dave ? I know its a Touring bike but please thats a poor Dnyo for a big bike Dude !