2017 Dyno comparison (new Gixxer)

Been a hard copy subscriber since 2004. How a bike fits Chris and me are two different things. That and about three eons of lap speed. I might add my bones are about 35 years older than his....

 

Let me know what you're looking for and I'll see if there's some way we can try to address it. Maybe not possible, but who knows? I'll look into it.

 

I have repeatedly offered my services as test rider. If people want to know things like slowest lap, crashability...

 

and How to not land chicks even with a MV, Ducati or a Bimota at bike night?

 

Yes.

 

VIRGIN!!!

 

No, everything I mentioned is within superstock rules.
It was a bit tongue-in-cheek, tho'.

As JU alluded, it's beyond feasible, but certainly things to consider.

Optional dyno tests aren't out of the question, but then you gotta run the same chain, same oil and coolant due to varying viscosities/lubricity, same break-in... (I'm an idealist, what can I say? )

 

Damn. He is white.



Dave, you look taller than I'd expect.

 

Ok,boys.. daddy's home and you're like "blah,blah,blah" making up excuses.
The king of sportbikes is back!
(I'm a Suzuki boy, I can't hide it )

 

the limitations of Superstock rules can and do impact the results. its not always just HP keeping some bikes off the podium. imagine if WSTK1000 raced Dunlops and didnt allow triple clamps. im sure the consistent class results would change in a noticeable way. i agree with u completely that WSTK1000 is our best metric for determining which bikes are the "best". but it doesnt eliminate all factors and it def doesnt blame results for just one thing such at HP.

 

I think this was a good comparison of what the street guys can get. He even ran the same rear tire on every bike. Not everyone spends $2k on a full exhaust and tune with brand new bikes. Hell, I've never bought a full system or tuned a bike at all.
A full system and tune would be a great comparison as well, but then again so would any other variables added to each bike to compare. This list of possibilities is substantial and most people have a different idea of what they want to see. Me, I'm good with all stock but unrestricted comparisons, which with this being a euro test I think was the case.

 

It is true that some bikes work better with certain tire brands.

However, I don't think it is a coincidence that the ONLY 3 bikes that were EVER able to land on the podium over those several years, were the bikes that made the most HP in stock form. I find it hard to believe that those 3 bikes (with completely different chassis and engines) worked the best with Pirelli's, and that the results would be different if they were on a different tire. You have to remember that back then, Liter bikes were making around 156-164hp stock (depending on the bike/dyno). Then here comes the BMW, followed by the ZX10 and Panigale making 182-190 (again, depending on the bike and dyno).

That HP differential suddenly rendered all other OEM's uncompetitive in WSTK.

That isn't just coming from me, I have had the subscription for years and have seen all the races. That is also coming from the commentators and other people who were interviewed during the races. They often commented that the other bikes are simply giving up too much on acceleration out of the corners and on the straights. All of those riders are good, which makes the equipment more of a factor. At that level, a 20-25hp deficit is hard to overcome.

 

WANT.

 

I'm a little late to the thread but wasn't Ferrari notorious for doing this with their press cars? They'd send a car and a driver, some special tires and a van full of technicians to a test shootout?

I coulda sworn I remember them doing this.

 

Ferrari pretty much won't send a car unless they're guaranteed to win. The only way the let the FXX on Top Gear was with Schumacher driving!

 

Yup. Part of the reason why Chris Harris fell out with them for a long while. As a result he had to use customer cars for quite a while which seemed to piss Ferrari off even more

 

Why? You cant win a dyno session any more than you can win a track day.

Show it to me in a SuperStock race, otherwise its just bench racing.

 

Because it eliminates variables. Granted, WSTK is the best measuring stick as we talked about before. BUT, in a race you are still bringing in tons of variables like suspension quality and/or setup, tire quality/longevity, rider talent, rider size, age/mileage of the motor, track knowledge, gearing setup, and the million other variables that are involved in racing.

Take the WSTK example where the ONLY bikes capable of landing on the podium for several years were those 3 (Panigale, ZX10, BMW) that made the most HP in stock form (with all restrictions removed and a full exhaust). That test (that I was talking about) would tell you which bikes will make the most HP in unrestricted, but otherwise stock (motor) form. That would be good information to have for someone who plans on racing a bike in a series that doesn't allow motorwork.

It is sometimes hard to tell how much HP you will ultimately end up with in an unrestricted bike (when testing them off the showroom floor) because of the noise/emissions restrictions and the different ways OEMs go about conforming to them.

No, you can't win a dyno session. BUT you can find out if the bike you are thinking about buying is 15-20hp down to the competition in unrestricted, but otherwise stock form.

 

I think thats my point. An H2, ZX-14 or Hayabusa with flash will make the rest of those bikes look silly on a Dyno.

Remember Formula Extreme? A few teams tried the monster motor approach. Thousands of other examples in racing. And war machines.

Im interested in the whole package and to me road racing is the end-all be-all proving ground for Supersport bikes. I just dont think its all about the dyno except for bench racing, therefore I find stock dyno comparos of limited interest.

Mildly interesting to me would be a dyno test of a MotoAmerica SSTK grid At least then you would have each bike on level playing field in terms of mods and electronics.