Weekend cruiser
BTW: When I worked at AMPS we dynoed a standard 640 and saw 44BHP at the rear wheel. The spec quoted something like 55. I have to wonder what the actual RWHP is for both/all these bikes.[/QUOTE]
Ive got the 07 690 Supermoto. Replaced the very heavy standard twin can exhaust system with a single Titanium Acrapovic. Probably saved about 8kg in weight. Had it dynoed at AMPs and came up with 57 rwhp. It is considerably more powerful than standard.
has made a bo-bo in his nappies
Ive got the 07 690 Supermoto. Replaced the very heavy standard twin can exhaust system with a single Titanium Acrapovic. Probably saved about 8kg in weight. Had it dynoed at AMPs and came up with 57 rwhp. It is considerably more powerful than standard.[/quote]Originally Posted by blueblade
interesting. after some airbox work, a ti akra system and a mild road camshaft, my 03 640SM was dynoed at AMPS and had 55RWHP.
the cam didn't actually make much more power (1HP I think it was) but it did push the power up the rev range a bit and gave a more road oriented spread of power.
Bruce complained that it didn't wheely as well as a standard one and he was probably right; it wasn't set up for wheelies.
BTW: I recently swapped the catalytic purifiers on my 950 for the ti akras Patrick included in the deal. The difference was 12-14kg! Better still, that weight lopped off was from up high and I can feel the better handling (and power).
Weekend cruiser
No problems with wheelies on the 690. It has brilliant low and mid range power but runs out of breath and revs up top. Can wheelie off the throttle in second gear after a bit of practice but will flip over backwards with very little provocation in first gear. Ive gone down one tooth on front sprocket but top end is still around 185 kph and will cruise all day at 140
fükengrüven
Um, yeah, that's why I said 690SMC
IIRC the spec for the motor was 49 or 53hp, so 44 at the wheel would be reasonable. It's only 2nd hand info but I heard that a euro mag tested the 690SM (claimed 63hp) & got 65hp. Dynos vary anyway, I tend to treat the numbers as +/- 5hp.
Cheers
Clint
has made a bo-bo in his nappies
"It has brilliant low and mid range power but runs out of breath and revs up top."
that's why I put the road cam in mine. I rode exclusively with big bore sport bikes.
on the 950 i've gone down 1 tooth on the front sprocket and it's still overgeared. In top gear it's only about 4kph faster than 5th. I've oredered a 43t rear to see what happens.
more easily launching the front wheel will be part of the fun.
has made a bo-bo in his nappies
you did indeed but that's also why i noted the whole range. Comparing a $12800 Husaberg with a $20k KTM is apples and pears.
add $5-$7k worth of goodies to the Husaberg and imagine what it could be.............i'm frothing at the mouth even thinking of it
Highway Biker
[QUOTE=idleidolidyll;1230664on the 950 i've gone down 1 tooth on the front sprocket and it's still overgeared. In top gear it's only about 4kph faster than 5th. I've oredered a 43t rear to see what happens.
more easily launching the front wheel will be part of the fun.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I've got the 16T front sprocket on mine too - miles better - definitely should be standard on these. I think it is standard on the Superduke now.
Will you need a longer chain after fitting the 43T rear? I've had the jetting manually adjusted post Akras but it still feels a bit lean at times. Would you recommend AMPS dyno?
Has left the building
I had to go 16t front sprocket on my '05 SD but my '07 SD-R and I believe the "standard" SD have a re-worked gearbox so now there's no need to swap out the sprocket.
Vast improvement and no issues powering it up!
has made a bo-bo in his nappies
I'd certainly recommend Gavin at AMPS. He's honest and conscientious.
I'm not sure if I'll need a new chain, I have some adjustment left and will cross that bridge when i get to it.
I had Stephen Briggs at Triple X Moto do the jetting for me. He didn't have a dyno but had a barrel of experience. That said, I will dyno it some time to get it perfect.
It's not about the HP number though, it's about getting the fuel/air ratio right throughout the rev range.
Where's the ride?
And let's not forget that KTM only ever quote half-dry weights. So we need to know what units Husqvarna and Husaberg are using. (both Husky and 'Berg quote dry weights on the web)
Jap lovers are so used to seeing fudged dry weights they erroneously treat KTM numbers as dry and lies... measured my 640 Adventure the other day using the bathroom scales. KTM quote 158kg half-dry, I came up with 158.03kg!!
Cheers,
Colin
has made a bo-bo in his nappies
fair comment.
from what I have read, KTM quote weights as ready to ride with 1 litre of fuel in the tank. That's something BMW also do and I understand it's a non binding Euro 'standard'.
The japs lie through their teeth (i have read that they 'calculate' dry weight rather than actually weighing bikes and it's done completely dry: no way to ride those bikes. The POMES recently weighed a CBR600 'wet' as per the Euro 'standard' and got 188kg. I think the stated dry weight for the 06 was about 160kg.)
A Triumph insider advised me that they too go to great lengths to brag about unrealistic weights.
Having owned a 640 and thrown a leg over the Husaberg, i can confirm that the Hussie 'feels' considerably lighter than the KTM.
If you want a direct comparo; go to Triple X Moto in East Tamaki and talk to Stephen Briggs. He has both bikes sitting side by side (KTM690SM and Husaberg)
has made a bo-bo in his nappies
My 950SM is quoted as 192kg by KTM. I've taken off the porky mufflers and put on the ti Akra cans. This whacks off the best part of 12+kg so I reckon it's realistic weight is about 180kg ready to ride.
That in line fours were always listed as some 25+kg lighter than Euro twins always puzzled me until I understood the lies they tell.
Highway Biker
Yeah - I recently read an article in a UK bike mag testing the KTM 950Sm and the Ducati Hypermotard back to back. The manufacturers quoted weights showed the KTM as being heavier but when the magazine testers actually weighed both bikes "wet" the Duc was considereably heavier.
Where's the ride?
My understanding was empty fuel tank, never seen the 1L quoted. Where'd you see that?
Not AFAIK BMW don't - BMW quote full wet weight, that is with a full tank. So there are three different measurements when comparing KTM, BMW and ROW. And again you often see jap lovers pointing to the quoted BMW weight and decrying them as being seriously porky. (They may be, but quote me accurate numbers not ignorant horseshit!)
To the point that the last year or two of the carbed Tiger 900, they bumped up the quoted weight!! so that when they introduced the new 885i they could quote 'reduced weight' which was actually more than the originally-quoted 900 weight!
Which is what it's all about, unless you are racing, or until you have to pick the fucker up for the nth time.
Cheers,
Colin
Where's the ride?
Oh, and the Trophy is next for the moment of truth on the bathroom scales.
- Staintunes
+ Givi three-box rack
Be interesting to see just how heavy it is.
Every time I get on it, particularly if I've been riding the 640 Adventure for a while, it feels HEAVY, takes more effort to tip it on its side and also takes continued effort to hold it in the turns. Accelerates a bit harder, given it makes 3 times the power...
Cheers,
Colin
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks