V-twin vs inline 4?

[dangerous]

I dunno, go check out some VFR (800 or 1200) dyno graphs and you'll see a bottom end that isn't actually that impressive vs other configurations of similar displacement.
Also wonder how much of this stuff is actual characteristics of the configurations and how much is just in the tuning? All gets real complex when you factor in the crap they do to these poor engines to meet noise or emission standards, Not to mention the neutering of power in lower gears or revs to stop us maiming ourselves..

PS: Still V4 for me

I agree, spose I was more meaning older V4's ie carberated, I ran my 97 Vffer up on a rolling road and it out powered a 800 down low and over all by 1hp, it was dyno jetted tho, againdt a mates 900 ninja it hauled away down low, died a bit at 4g then took off again, only due to the inital low down power did I stay out frount.

[ducatilover]

The biggest reason people thing the V's are torque monsters is the power delivery.
More cylinders = more toque and better breathing = more torque. V-twin = less of everything, but will feel torquey due to the pulsing it makes from the firing order in comparison to a smooth six or four.

[gatch]

I see your inline 4 cylinder fagcycle and raise you another 4 cylinders.

Ludicrously expensive to replicate, totally impractical for anything except reminiscing and totally slow by modern standards. The 500cc Guzzi v8 shall remain forever king of the aural pleasure department and at the top of my "what if" list of bikes.

Suck my balls.

[dangerous]

I see your inline 4 cylinder fagcycle and raise you another 4 cylinders.

Ludicrously expensive to replicate, totally impractical for anything except reminiscing and totally slow by modern standards. The 500cc Guzzi v8 shall remain forever king of the aural pleasure department and at the top of my "what if" list of bikes.

Suck my balls.

no thanks...
now tell us what ya know about this legendary Guzzi 8?
and perhaps you should google Drysdale

[5150]

The biggest reason people thing the V's are torque monsters is the power delivery.
More cylinders = more toque and better breathing = more torque. V-twin = less of everything, but will feel torquey due to the pulsing it makes from the firing order in comparison to a smooth six or four.

So that is why all/most of the MotoGP bikes have a V configuration motors? Mostly V5, and even in the 2 stroke era they were mostly V4's

[98tls]

in my 28yrs of riding on the road I have had just 0n3 IL4, a 82 GSX750ez... ohh I lie recently had a 83 Kat for post classic racing, thing is the old IL4's have a different feel/sound to todays car engined bikes, other wise a couple a V4's (awesom low tug of a V2 and the top end haul of a muiltie. Other wise all twins mostely V's and the odd single, just like a bike should be

Nice D but one has to wonder what you would think of a Vtwin with the motor put in the right way.Imagine that,all the hard work was done,the bright buggers packed up and headed home confident they had a winning design as they went out the door they said to the 2 young fellas "its all done just put the motor in and shes good to go"how could they fuck that up?

[dangerous]

Nice D but one has to wonder what you would think of a Vtwin with the motor put in the right way.Imagine that,all the hard work was done,the bright buggers packed up and headed home confident they had a winning design as they went out the door they said to the 2 young fellas "its all done just put the motor in and shes good to go"how could they fuck that up?

LMFAO just cos you asked... I have had 6 V2's including a turbo and 2 parallel 2's the right way round, AND 1 V2 arse about face, it just wasnt right.

[tigertim20]

So that is why all/most of the MotoGP bikes have a V configuration motors? Mostly V5, and even in the 2 stroke era they were mostly V4's

none of the current brood are a V5, and havent been for quite some time, though, I will concede that that is due to regulation changes . .. Yamaha had a dominant streak on the IL4 untill recently too though.

bringing the strokes into it adds a whole different dimension too.

and moto gp bikes are a world apart from what we have in the real world

[lostinflyz]

So that is why all/most of the MotoGP bikes have a V configuration motors? Mostly V5, and even in the 2 stroke era they were mostly V4's

nothing of the sort, most gp bikes (all bar Yamahaha, the kwak was too) v4's as it aids packaging of the entire motorcycle to acheive perfect weight distribution and an ideal CoG. A v4 has some advantages over IL4's in terms of making a whole bike (easier to place intakes/airbox, exhaust, tank, width and weight distribution is easier to move), but they are essentially identical in terms of power (they are 4 cylinders of the same size, usually firing in a similar order). The only x mark in production motorcycle world is the cost of making V4's vs IL4's (double heads, cams, timing ect ect).

[98tls]

LMFAO just cos you asked... I have had 6 V2's including a turbo and 2 parallel 2's the right way round, AND 1 V2 arse about face, it just wasnt right.

All good,have a great Xmas you 23 or is it 4,sorry guys cant remember.Am coming up Sunday to spend it with the old girl whose busy once again cleaning up.

[ducatilover]

So that is why all/most of the MotoGP bikes have a V configuration motors? Mostly V5, and even in the 2 stroke era they were mostly V4's

Skinnier in V form.
I cannot fathom why a V will give better torque.
The firing order, rod/stroke/bore ratios, V.E and BMEP don't seem to be effected at all.
The biggest plus for a Vee engine is packaging, may be worth having that over the added weight (probably negligible on a bike) compared to an inline engine.

I'm happy to learn though

[ducatilover]

nothing of the sort, most gp bikes (all bar Yamahaha, the kwak was too) v4's as it aids packaging of the entire motorcycle to acheive perfect weight distribution and an ideal CoG. A v4 has some advantages over IL4's in terms of making a whole bike (easier to place intakes/airbox, exhaust, tank, width and weight distribution is easier to move), but they are essentially identical in terms of power (they are 4 cylinders of the same size, usually firing in a similar order). The only x mark in production motorcycle world is the cost of making V4's vs IL4's (double heads, cams, timing ect ect).

You bet me to it

[GrayWolf]

really it comes down to 2 things.. preference AND tuning.
A multi cylinder bike will be smoother in power delivery, it will also rev faster due to the simple fact that it has more cylinders 'firing' each revolution, when compared to a twin.
Torque, grunt?? That comes down to tuning.. I always pooh poohed 4's for bottom end power delivery untill I rode and owned an FJ yamaha,,V twins can produce amazing power, ask Ducati and the multi's that used to follow Carl Fogerty over the finish line. Comparing my last two 4's FJ and ZZR, the FJ will destroy the zed for low down power, but once 6000 rpm is reached the zed is a missile. I prefer the feel and lazy power delivery of a big twin, and my new one produces 110ft LBS of torque, that is MORE than the R1 produces at full power, however it only revs to 5500rpm.. so the power delivery is 'lazy'...I just rode it over the Nelson Hill and the Kaikoura's.... gear change?? whats that? on the zed and maybe the FJ I would be cog swapping.
Top speed is only? 210-220kph.. and I dont care, the grin factor is immense, and yes as ducatilover pointed out... Oh man can you feel those massive tin can sized pistons at work... it's an old school bike feel, with modern handling and reliability.

[dangerous]

Nice D but one has to wonder what you would think of a Vtwin with the motor put in the right way.Imagine that,all the hard work was done,the bright buggers packed up and headed home confident they had a winning design as they went out the door they said to the 2 young fellas "its all done just put the motor in and shes good to go"how could they fuck that up?

ok then chap... hows this, any better?

[GrayWolf]

ok then chap... hows this, any better?

Oh my, that's just 'wrong' on so many levels......