Dyno Test

[gbagen]

I just had my bike (2007) dynoed at Cliff's in CT. I tested out at 84 hp and 66 torque. This is way less than a string here in 2009, and Motorcylist magazine, each of which got about 100/77. Incidentally, I had another bike done the same day, and the results matched Motorcyclist perfectly. I always thought that the RR ran well, but not that is was 100HP quick. Anyone have any ideas as to why it's this way?

[rokinrider]

Miles, valves, plugs, state of TB bieng in sync??? From a snowmobile standpoint there is so much free HP available ya never know. Mine is still newand tight and I plan on using synthetic fluids in tranny, differential and engine. These should net a few more HP\TQ on a Dyno. I also believe in the butt dyno and smiling as I roast by a yuppy on his new HD shiny glide. Just my .02 cents!! Ride it , enjoy it.....

[Don C]

Crankshaft horesepower vs rear wheel horsepower?

[TT RDHS]

Mine was on the dyno, a couple weeks ago...
This is what my bike did-
The base run (before any changes) showed 98.66 hp & 74.94 ft-lbs.(rear wheel)
After the installing a Staintune (full system) , PC III (Power Commander), and tuning (using the stock air-filter & w/o the db killer)...
The final run showed 106.57 hp & 81.26 ft-lbs.
The run conditions were - 110.54 F, 28.31in-Hg, Humidity: 9%, SAE: 1.09
Done on a DYNOJET RESEARCH dyno at GO AZ Motorcycles, in Scottsdale Az.
The tuning was done by Mark Ladesma.
Keep in mind every dyno is different.
It's just a tool to aid in tuning.
Comparisons of horsepower from different bikes on different dynos, have very little significance.

On that same dyno a year earlier an R12R was tuned with Leo slip-ons and a re-map with a power commander, and that bike had a peak horse power of 110.
Oh well...

[gbagen]

This is what Motorcyclist got, too (100/77). If different dynos were the only factor, I'd assume dyno variation, but since my Suzuki was spot on with the Motorcyclist dyno run and the Dyno Solutions reading in CT, the R12R being very different does not add up. I have a friend bringing his R12R to be done soon to see where his fits in. I'll post his results when I have them. In any event, if my R is only putting out 85/65, something is wrong.

[Ric]

by gbagen » Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:44 pm .......if my R is only putting out 85/65, something is wrong.

You don't tell us your bike milage or how many miles from last service or what the last service consisted of; valve adjust, TB balanced, etc....what kind of fuel do you run, different air-filter, etc... ? It would be good for all us interested here to know some other background.

And TT RDHS is correct....the absolute value on a dyno is not as important as the delta you get when making changes. But with your numbers being so low; I'd have to suspect the only two options available; the bike or the dyno.....I might have gone straight to a different dyno.

Please keep us updated....

[Acpantera]

Fuel? Maybe hi ethanol content or low octane?

[gbagen]

The bike is stock except for a ZTechnik slip-on. It has only 9K miles on it. It has been dealer serviced with regular oil changes, only gets 93 octane name brand fuel and runs as smooth as silk.

[deilenberger]

The bike is stock except for a ZTechnik slip-on. It has only 9K miles on it. It has been dealer serviced with regular oil changes, only gets 93 octane name brand fuel and runs as smooth as silk.

Ah.. ha..

Has it been dyno'd without the ZTechnik? It certainly wouldn't be the first time that a pipe causes a performance loss.. (Staintune had one for the K75's that took 25% of the power away..) An A:B test of ZTechnik vs Stock might be quite revealiing.

[gbagen]

While it has not been dynoed before and after the pipe, I did not feel any difference after the change. I just did it because I thought that the stock can was too big. The new one is a little smaller, maybe a little louder, but with no discernable difference in pep.

[deilenberger]

While it has not been dynoed before and after the pipe, I did not feel any difference after the change. I just did it because I thought that the stock can was too big. The new one is a little smaller, maybe a little louder, but with no discernable difference in pep.

I'd be really interested in the A:B comparo - same dyno, same day. I've found that very revealing (I've never found a pipe that made useful horsepower with a stock BMW.. and I dyno'd quite a few.) As I mentioned - some are simply awful. Look nice, sound nice, make less power (mebbe 1HP more at max RPM - but the overall power under the curve is abysmal.

If you still have the stock pipe - and a friendly dyno owner - shouldn't take long to do.

[lewellen]

While it has not been dynoed before and after the pipe, I did not feel any difference after the change. I just did it because I thought that the stock can was too big. The new one is a little smaller, maybe a little louder, but with no discernable difference in pep.

Okay ... please don't take this as critical, it's an honest question ... but if you didn't change out the can for the potential for more HP, and you're okay with how much power it has right now ... who cares what the dyno says? Or are you actually looking to get more power out?

Good roads,

- Lewellen

[gbagen]

I'm OK with 86 HP, but if I'm supposed to have 100, and I can get it, I want it. The difference between my Bandit 1250 with 100 HP and the R12 is dramatic. I'd love to get that same rush on the R.